Orbit Post Sitemap
Is listing US stock assets on-chain a good thing or a bad thing for the crypto world?
Today marks Ruoshui's 69th day of holding $OKB. He refuses to use leverage and does not trade contracts, only trading long-term spot trades. If you have chips you can't hold, follow me and let's weather bull and bear markets together
With US stock assets listed on-chain, many people worry that the stock of crypto funds will be diverted in large quantities. Is this a good thing or a bad thing? Ruoshui shares his one-sided view.
In the short term, there is indeed a risk of funds being diverted.
Tokens like Nvidia and Apple in US stocks can still be traded on-chain 24 hours a day.
On one side are the wildly rising and falling altcoins with no real revenue; on the other are the famous US blue chips. When the market is quiet and bear market is grinding, many people withdraw their money from the crypto world to buy on-chain stocks.
This is especially true for various knockoff small coins, which will be hit hardest. With limited speculative capital, some will lose their destination, which is a major negative factor.
But in the long run, it's not entirely a bad thing.
Putting US stocks on-chain isn't just about grabbing existing crypto money; it's more about opening the door between traditional finance and blockchain, bringing in incremental capital from Wall Street.
Now, through tokenized stocks, you can access the on-chain world. Some funds will spill over from US stock tokens, and you can then allocate to Bitcoin and Ethereum
The positive factors mainly come from $BTC, $ETH, and platform tokens
Only buy Bitcoin, Ethereum, SOL, high-quality platform coins OKB, An'an during bear markets, hold long-term, sell in bull markets, there's only one coin in the crypto world, always hold one Bitcoin!Consumption has collapsed, but inflation expectations have risen—the Fed is now "wrong no matter what it does."
On one hand, ordinary Americans feel the economy is doomed.
On one hand, ordinary Americans feel prices will continue to rise.
On August 14, the University of Michigan Consumer Confidence Index was released—51.0.
This is a 7.6% drop from last month's 55.2. This is exactly 4 points lower than economists' expected 55. This is the first decline in three months.
But in the same report, the one-year inflation forecast rose from 4.2% to 4.3%.
Confidence is collapsing, inflation expectations are rising.
It's like someone saying "I'm starving" while saying, "The price of food will go up."
What do you think he'll do next?
The answer is: do nothing—because he has no money.
July retail sales data released on the same day fell 0.6% month-on-month.
The market originally expected a growth of 0.1%. The gap between the forecast and reality was 0.7 percentage points.
Car sales plunged 1.8%, and online shopping also shrank. Excluding cars, retail sales still fell 0.3%.
This isn't a problem in one area; it's the entire consumer base collapsing.
Looking at ordinary people's wages—the real average hourly wage in July fell by 0.2% year-on-year.
Prices are rising, wages are falling, and consumption is collapsing.
In a University of Michigan survey, only 8% of consumers expect their income growth to outpace inflation.
92% feel that they are getting poorer as they live.
Short-term business environment expectations declined by 11%, while long-term expectations plunged by 17%.
Joanne Hsu, head of consumer research, quoted that the elderly, low-income families, and those without a college degree experienced the most severe drop in confidence—"These groups are especially vulnerable to inflation eroding purchasing power."
In other words: those who can't bear inflation the most are truly experiencing it.
So what does this mean for BTC?
Two completely opposite forces are pulling each other apart.
On the positive side: Consumption collapsed, retail collapsed—the need for a Fed rate hike in September is decreasing. Money market pricing shows only about a 35% chance of a rate hike in September.
If rate hikes stop, liquidity conditions improve—BTC valuations are supported.
On the negative side: inflation expectations are still at 4.3%—more than half below the Fed's 2% target. Chicago Fed President Goolsbee quoted: "We need to see similar data in the coming months to confirm that inflation is steadily returning to the 2% target."
The period for interest rates to remain high may be forced to prolong—risk asset valuations continue to be under pressure.
On one side is "the economy is bad, so we have to ease liquidity," on the other is "prices are still rising, so we can't ease the funds."
What the Fed is facing now is not "overheated demand"—that is the problem for 2024.
Now it is "inflation still above target + consumption starting to stall."
Two paths ahead of the Fed—
Rate hikes → have completely crushed already collapsed consumption.
No rate hikes → allowing 4.3% inflation to continue eroding people's purchasing power.
No matter how you do it, it's always wrong.
BTC is caught in this gap—what will happen in the short term?
Most likely, the sideways trend will continue.
In early August, BTC was near $63,210. CPI dropped to 3.4%, and BTC was still fluctuating between $64K and $66K. After the August 14 data came out, gold surged to $4,378, while BTC was still grinding below $65K.
The market is waiting—waiting for the Fed to make the first mistake.
But there is only one medium-term direction—
Fiat currency credit is damaged on both sides,
Bitcoin is the only export.
When the economy collapses, fiat currency is printed. When inflation rises, fiat currency depreciates.
No matter which path the Fed chooses, the dollar's real purchasing power is declining.
Bitcoin doesn't need the Fed to get it right—it just needs that whatever the Fed does isn't right.
$BTC $ETH $XAU #消费动能转弱, September policy remains constrained by inflation The US July CPI data generally met market expectations, with no significant fluctuations exceeding expectations. CPI year-on-year was 3.4%, slightly down from the previous value of 3.5%; Month-on-month was 0.1%, also in line with expectations. Core CPI rose 0.2% month-on-month and 2.5% year-on-year, both in line with expectations. Overall, this data is relatively neutral with a slight dovish tendency, indicating that inflation continues to decline slightly year-on-year, but the intensity is not strong, and the short-term impact on the market is limited.At 10 p.m., $BTC 63150, $ETH 1885, $SOL 75.6. The weekend market was like a stagnant pool, but contract interest was quietly rising.
This is not a bad thing. Historically, before every major market start, it was always this "no one watched" situation. In October 2020 and February 2024, Saturdays saw volume shrink and bottoming out, and Monday suddenly saw a surge in volume.
My experience: Don't focus on the minute line on weekends; focus on two things—changes in open interest and the Asian session at 8 a.m. on Monday. Who's secretly building positions will be revealed at the open.
If you have a position, hold it tight; if not, don't worry. The market won't come faster just because you're in a hurry.
$BTC $ETH $SOLLet's briefly talk about ETH's recent market trends.
$ETH Overall, it fluctuated with Bitcoin, but clearly underperformed $BTC, repeatedly pushing the $2000 mark and falling below each time. This is a typical case of "plenty of good news, but price stays steady."
1. Institutions are not providing strong support; ETH spot ETFs continue to see capital outflows, and institutional funds prefer Bitcoin, a "digital gold" for safe haven, unwilling to keep increasing their ETH holdings.
2. The ecosystem looks lively, with Layer2 activity being high, but most of the yield remains on the Layer 2 network. Mainnet fees and token burns are not ideal, and on-chain prosperity hasn't been well reflected in coin prices. DeFi and NFT haven't seen explosive market moments either, lacking hype stories.
3. External funds are being siphoned off by US stocks. Recently, AI hardware and aerospace stocks have been making strong profits, and the crypto sector is lacking incremental funds overall; When market sentiment is cautious, people prioritize selling highly volatile ETH and holding Bitcoin, so ETH falls even harder during pullbacks.
4. There are indeed quite a few staking locked positions; selling pressure is not devastating, but there is a lack of active buying. Currently, the market is neither going up nor down, so if it holds the support level, it moves sideways. Once the market pulls back, ETH often pulls back even more.
Brief summary:
$ETH Fundamentals have no major issues, but there is a lack of independent rally narrative, institutional buying is absent, and external capital divergence is serious. To break out of an independent rally, either ETF inflows are renewed or the on-chain ecosystem explodes; otherwise, it is highly likely to continue following Bitcoin's passive fluctuations. #消费动能转弱, September policy is still constrained by inflation Over the past month, storage stocks have experienced a very interesting rally. Previously, SanDisk, Micron, and SK Hynix had both plunged consecutively, prompting the market to question whether the storage supercycle had ended; But recently, the trend suddenly reversed, with SanDisk rising over 13% in a single day, and Micron, WDC, and SK Hynix also quickly recovering. If you just think of it as "rebounding after a big drop," you're actually wasting this round of rallying. The most important lesson for investors this month is that a sharp drop in stock prices does not mean the fundamentals have suddenly deteriorated, and a sharp rise in stock prices does not mean the industry has suddenly improved. What truly changes dramatically is often market expectations. 1. During the earlier crash, the industry did not deteriorate in tandem. Looking back at the previous decline, a clear divergence emerges: stocks fell sharply, but the storage industry did not deteriorate in tandem. In the third quarter, DRAM and NAND contract prices are still expected to rise, and AI data center investments have not significantly stopped. What really changed was that the market began to worry about the future. Previously, storage had risen so much that people were trading not "good performance this year," but "how long can this high prosperity last?" Once concerns begin about production expansion, increased supply, and slowed price increases in 2027, even if current earnings remain strong, stocks could fall by 30% or more prematurely. This is the most counterintuitive aspect of cyclical stocks: stock prices are not traded today or not, but whether the future will be better than current expectations. 2. Why is it rising so quickly now? Because the market realized that the previous pessimistic expectations might have been too strong. Recently, it's not just SanDisk that has rebounded; Micron,Investment explosion, a 100 million yuan bet, essentially a clash between Moutai and tech stocks
Duan Yongping dared to bet 100 million yuan on Moutai, but Bin did not accept.
Duan Yongping's logic is simple:
Moutai is one of China's best companies, worth holding long-term, even daring to bet 100 million yuan against domestic funds' returns.
But Bin's view is more interesting:
Moutai remains a core asset, but investment cannot only look at the past.
Entering the AI era, the world is continuously spawning new high-growth sectors. Rather than stubbornly holding traditional core assets, it's better to broaden your vision globally and seek the next batch of companies with real long-term growth potential.
So this is not a question of whether Moutai is good or not.
Times are changing, industries are changing, and investors should constantly break out of their comfort zones.
The real answer may not lie in whether Moutai can win, but whether you are willing to wait ten years for a business you understand, whether it's Moutai or tech stocks.
Time is a friend to great companies and an enemy to mediocre ones. The national team has already voted with their feet.先來跟大家說說 OKB 吧。
目前看起來它還是一路向北地往上漲，基本上應該可以再觀察一下。
現在絕對不是一個介入的好位置，大家等它有回檔的時候，想要再進場再進場。
畢竟以它過往的走勢，雖然說這次真的相對強得有點離譜，不過依照過往的規律，它也是會拉個好幾根然後再跌下去。
消息面部分，這波持續上漲主要還是延續紐約證交所母公司 ICE 入股 OKX 的題材，OKX 當時估值來到 250 億美元，這筆投資讓 OKB 的機構信任度大幅提升
供給結構上，OKB 總量已經燒毀到只剩 2100 萬顆，是通縮型代幣，市場上不少人拿它跟 BNB 過去因為類似利多題材、加上代幣燒毀而長期走強的模式相提並論。
不過也要提醒一下，市場上有一派聲音認為，如果 OKX 未來真的走向美股 IPO，交易所本身有可能會跟 OKB 代幣做結構性切割，一旦 OKB 失去跟交易所手續費折扣掛鉤的實際用途，長線需求可能會停滯，這是目前市場上比較大的分歧點。Mine owners didn't wait for the bull market anymore; they switched to different industries
The most surreal scene of this cycle occurred: on one side, BTC once dropped 17% in 2026, grinding in a box that left people disheartened; On the other hand, Bitcoin mining companies signed over $70 billion in AI data center contracts, and mining stocks collectively rose more than 50%. Bitcoin mining companies rose by not mining Bitcoin — this is something worth discussing in detail.
The logic isn't complicated. In the mining business, revenue depends entirely on hashprice; if the coin price drops, halving, then a cut, profits are as thin as paper. But these mining companies have two things AI companies dream of: ready-made power ratings and well-built data centers. AI computing power demand explodes, data centers are in short supply, miners pull down their rigs and install GPUs, transforming into HPC infrastructure providers, turning revenue from "gambling" into "rent"—stable, predictable, and long-term contracts. Capital naturally votes with its feet—valuing mining business based on cycles, valuing AI contracts based on cash flow, the latter being much more valuable.
What does this mean for $BTC? In the short term, this is a good thing: mining companies don't have to sell coins to survive in bear markets, selling pressure is reduced, and operators of computing power networks become wealthier. But in the long run, there's a subtle change: when mining becomes just a side business for mining companies, the narrative of the BTC industry chain is no longer pure. The weight of the term "hash asset power" will increasingly be tied to electricity and AI rather than to on-chain activities.
Looking at ETH, it takes a completely opposite path. Ethereum has long since left the mining machine era. Under the PoS system, ETH's value is supported by staking yields, validator networks, LSTs, and on-chain activity in the entire DeFi ecosystem. It doesn't need electricity stories; it's a "yield-type network asset"—if you stake ETH, you get real cash returns, theoretically becoming more like an on-chain bond. So now, the valuation anchors of the two chains are completely separated: BTC looks at hash rate and energy narratives, $ETH on staking yields and whether on-chain financial activity can hold up.
Back to the market. As of 10 p.m. on August 14, BTC's current price was near $63,500, nearly flat for 24 hours, down 1.16% for a week, stuck in a range between 62,000 and 66,000. Support between 62,000 and 62,800 is support, 64,000 to 65,500 is resistance, and only above 66,000 does it count as true strength. ETH current price near $1,885, with little fluctuation in 24 hours. SOL is currently at $76.08, up 0.7% in 24 hours and up 4.6% for the week, showing a clear outperformance of the broader market. DOGE is currently priced at $0.0694, down about 1%. The Fear and Greed Index is 30, and market sentiment is still hovering in the fear zone.
Interestingly, the 50% rise in mining stocks and BTC's five-week sideways consolidation occurred simultaneously, indicating that capital is already pricing the "BTC supply chain" and "BTC itself" separately. The core contradiction in this market now is that infrastructure is rapidly evolving while asset prices remain stagnant—mining companies have found a second growth curve, ETH is refining its yield narrative, and only the token price is waiting for a reason to encourage retail investors to enter again.
Infrastructure comes first, price follows, and every cycle follows this script. The only difference this time is that the shovel sellers are the ones who started first.#消费动能转弱, September policy is still constrained by inflation$BTC Honestly, watching the market these past two days has really been a bit messy.
While the S&P and Nasdaq are celebrating, Bitcoin bucked the trend and fell below 63,000, and spot ETFs have been withdrawing for two consecutive days, with $192 million gone in an instant. Seeing the screen full of green, many people are probably starting to panic again. But I actually think that if you only attribute this drop to a "seesaw of funds," that's too superficial. What lies behind this is actually Bitcoin's ongoing "restructuring of underlying pricing logic"
I have observed a very painful phenomenon: Bitcoin is deeply decoupling from US stocks. In the past, we were used to the script of "US stocks rising, crypto follows," but now that logic is collapsing. Why? Because US Treasury yields are there, institutions can easily get 5% risk-free returns, so why risk entering the crypto market? Against the backdrop of delayed Fed rate cut expectations, capital prefers to embrace tech stocks supported by earnings. Bitcoin is painfully transitioning from a "highly elastic risk asset" to an "independently priced commodity," and this transition period is destined to be tough.
The derivatives sector is even more turbulent. You see $BCH short sellers going wild (open interest surging 10%) and HBAR funding rates ridiculously negative—these are all microcosms of shrinking liquidity. Without inflows from incremental funds, the stock game has become "whoever liquidates first pays." Bitcoin's open interest increases but prices weaken, a typical example of "bear-led position building."The latest U.S. inflation and employment data have cooled in tandem, further fueling market expectations that the Federal Reserve will start cutting rates in September, but there are still clear disagreements within the Federal Open Market Committee regarding the policy path. According to data from the U.S. Department of Labor, the year-on-year increase in May CPI fell from 3.5% to 3.4%, and core CPI fell from 2.6% to 2.5%; During the same period, PPI year-on-year growth slowed sharply from 5.5% to 4.7%, while core PPI dropped from 4.7% to 4.2%. Signs of loosening in the labor market also emerged, with initial jobless claims for the week rising to 209,000. The combination of these three data points—declining inflation combined with weakening employment—provides more arguments for a rate cut in September. Views within the Federal Reserve on the direction of interest rates are not consensus. Board member Hamack advocates for continued rate hikes, arguing that current policy rates are "not restrictive enough"; Richmond Fed President Barkin stated that several officials believe current rates are at sufficiently tight levels. One side advocates further tightening, while the other believes there is no need to rush action, with significant policy positions diverging. The interest rate futures market no longer fully priced in the possibility of a rate hike this year, with US Treasury yields falling across the board and the S&P 500 index hitting a new all-time high. The market is clearly no longer waiting for officials' comments, but is now factoring in rate cuts in advance. Bullish commodities also released positive news. WTI crude oil futures fell more than 2% that day, approaching $81 per barrel; Brent crude fell back to $87 per barrel. The geopolitical stalemate in the Strait of Hormuz has not yet been resolved, but the actual risk premium is shrinking. Weaker oil prices have further suppressed inflation expectations,#消费动能转弱, September policy remains constrained by inflation
Currently, global consumer demand continues to weaken, and the recovery in terminal sales is weaker than expected. However, persistent inflation persists, directly limiting the space for easing policy in September, becoming the biggest macroeconomic constraint at present.
The overall economy shows a typical "strong supply, weak demand" pattern: production remains relatively resilient, but household consumption and real economy continue to cool, and domestic demand recovery is weak. The market originally expected the implementation of easing in September to support the economy, but was directly suppressed by inflation data.
The core contradiction is clear: although overall inflation remains low, core inflation has continued to rebound slightly and stickiness has not faded. Policymakers are reluctant to recklessly inject monetary policy to avoid easing stimulus pushing prices higher and triggering repeated inflation fluctuations. Therefore, September monetary and fiscal policy was mainly cautious and watchful, with structural adjustments making minimal major positive developments.
1. The macro sector lacks strong easing catalysts, so the market can only follow a structural rally, making it difficult to see a broad-based bull market;
2. Weakening consumption suppresses overall risk appetite, with high-level themes and counterfeit volatility amplifying, and profit-making effects concentrated in BTC and ETH blue chips;
3. Policy expectations will be disappointed, which will continue to suppress market bullish sentiment, with the market mainly showing fluctuations, bottoming, and range-bound recovery.
The current market is not a bearish sell-off, but a grinding without incremental volume. Weak consumption limits economic expectations, sticky inflation traps easing expectations, and both sides limit market space.
In terms of operations, avoid chasing highs or heavy positions to play one-sided, position core blue chips on dips in spot markets, strictly control contract leverage, wait for inflation turning points and easing signals to materialize before starting a new rally cycle.Last round, my counterfeiting strategy was chasing the rally. I saw a list of gainers and jumped in. There were no problems at first, but later I was scammed by some listed companies. So this round I focused on early-stage projects. So far, the results are decent. The previous $koma was several times higher. I just checked the $h and $robo, which were also good. There were also two other slow growth that was hard to tell if they ended or before the start, but they also rose
$H When I entered, it was 0.06. Because the discovery volume was relatively stable, both contract and spot were net inflows, so I guessed it was accumulation. Now it's 0.012
$ROBO When I discovered it, the daily spot trading volume was only 200,000 to 600,000 U. The market dropped sharply but didn't follow it, but it slowly rose. Later, there was a sudden low volume rally and several test sessions. However, this was likely a bit of a 'big shot' entering and slowly reaching 0.012
Both are slow and have little volume, but when they rise, our goal is to make money. Whether it's fast entry and exit or slow rises, these are what we seek. However, the next round of trading might change againThere's a very interesting phenomenon in the crypto market recently: the market isn't particularly strong, but it's hard to call it weak either. $BTC has fluctuated repeatedly at high levels, $ETH has not experienced uncontrollable rebounds. Although many altcoins have not fully launched, they have started to show frequent local fluctuations. As a result, the market falls into a very typical state: bulls believe the next bull market is about to begin, while bears think the current position has little chance left. But from the perspective of capital trading, the real issue worth discussing now is not "rising or falling today." Rather: Are off-exchange funds really ready to expand their risk exposure again? This may be the key to determining the next stage of the market level. The market doesn't lack upward movement; what it lacks is a "confirmed rise." Many people make the most common mistake when watching the market is to directly interpret price increases as a capital trend already formed. In reality, these two things are quite different. Prices can rise due to short covering, insufficient liquidity, or a large order temporarily pushing up the order position. But to truly support a mid-level rally, three factors usually need to appear simultaneously: breakout, trading volume, and capital sustainability. If one is missing, it could be a feint. Especially during this high-level consolidation phase, simply breaking through a technical resistance level is no longer as important as it once was. What is truly worth trading is what happens in the market after the breakout. If trading volume rapidly increases after the $BTC breakout, ETFs,The shadow of policy pressure falls on the hardware supply chain, with restrictions on $AAPL memory chip procurement rapidly evolving into a game of cost expectations.
Recently, Changxin Memory and Yangtze Memory raised their quotes, and the rise in spot prices has simultaneously raised the procurement benchmarks for the entire memory chip sector.
Alternative suppliers such as Micron, SK Hynix, and Samsung are receiving potential share bias, but overall supply constraints are driving up inflation expectations and suppressing short-term risk appetite.
The upward shift in hardware material costs, combined with the difficulty of switching suppliers, prompted defensive funds to proactively reduce long positions on the eve of the market opening.
If overseas storage manufacturers quickly release redundant capacity to fill the gap, the easing of cost pressures will drive safe-haven funds back, thereby supporting valuation stabilization.
If policies lack a buffer period and substitution premiums are too high, expectations of gross margin damage will trigger further position reductions, suppressing prices to test downward pressure.
Once the policy implementation details provide substantial exemptions or extensions, the downward pricing logic for supply chain inflation will be immediately disproven.
The most noteworthy variable to watch over the next seven days is the actual quotes and delivery cycles provided by mainstream storage manufacturers for specific procurement adjustments.
#韩股十日反弹逾22%, chip stocks lead the gains, #特朗普因TruthSocial付费数据流遭起诉 #高盛收购Neos crypto ETFs shift to earnings competition[A Heng Weekly Review | August 10–15]
With macro data cooling down, why did BTC still fall about 2.8% over the week?
1. This week's results
BTC is about $63,053, down about 2.8% over 7 days; ETH is about $1,883, down about 1.5%; SOL is about $75.51, down about 2.2%.
The Fear and Greed Index rose from 30 last week to 34, still in the 'fear' zone; The altcoin season index rose to 50 but has not yet entered a full altcoin season.
Based on Farside's daily final value, US spot ETF funds this week:
BTC: Net outflow of approximately $329.7 million
ETH: Net outflow of about $3 million
SOL: Net inflow of about $8.8 million, all concentrated on Monday
2. Review each item one by one
Judgment 1: BTC's institutional incremental funds are weakening.
Actual result: Established.
BTC ETFs saw only a small net inflow this week on Tuesday, while the rest of the trading days were generally under pressure; BTC prices also failed to regain the $64,000 level.
Bias: Underestimating the final scale of capital outflows. Some daily reports use intraday data that has not yet been fully compiled.
Judgment 2: ETH and SOL are only partial capital divergences and cannot be used to confirm full rotation.
Actual result: basically established.
ETH ETFs still saw slight net outflows this week; Although SOL recorded net inflows, there was no continuity. ETH and SOL also pulled back on the weekly chart.
It should be added that the Shanzhai Season Index rose from about 42 to 50, indicating that risk appetite for some funds has indeed spread, though a general market trend has not yet formed.
Judgment 3: CPI and PPI cooling can only ease macro pressure and cannot confirm trends alone.
Actual result: Established.
US July CPI rose 0.1% month-on-month, PPI remained flat, but core PPI still rose 0.4% month-on-month; Retail sales fell 0.6% month-on-month.
The macro environment has not significantly worsened, but it has not translated into sustained ETF inflows and price breakouts. The market is still waiting for confirmation of capital conditions.
Judgment 4: The SEC meeting may provide new regulatory catalysts.
Actual result: verification conditions failed.
The SEC public meeting originally scheduled to discuss certain crypto asset issuance rules was canceled, and no new rule conclusions were formed this week. The regulatory catalyst is only delayed, not already implemented.
3. This week's public error correction
This is the most important issue to clarify this week:
I prematurely used ETF data that was not fully aggregated in some daily reports. For example, on August 11, BTC ETFs recorded a net outflow of about $42.4 million, with a final net inflow of about $7.8 million; On August 10, the ETH ETF also revised its initial net inflow to a final net outflow of about $14.6 million.
This is a data timing error.
Although the weekly judgment that "BTC funds are weak and has not formed a full rotation" remains unchanged, the single-day facts must be based on the final value.
In future reports, daily reports will clearly indicate "preliminary value" or "final value"; weekly reviews will only use the full final value of the trading day.
4. Verification indicators next week
Can BTC ETFs return to net inflows over five days?
Can BTC recover and stabilize above $64,000?
Whether ETH and SOL can see at least three consecutive trading days of capital inflows
Whether the Quarterly Index can continue from 50 to approach 75 while BTC's market share continues to decline
After the macro data cooled, will US Treasury yields fall in sync with the dollar?
Current conclusion:
This week is not about "macro positive factors failing to take effect," but rather that after macro pressures ease, incremental funds have yet to take over.
First look at the funds, then listen to the story; First write about the failure conditions, then share your opinions.
This post is for market research and information exchange only and does not constitute investment advice.Money didn't leave. It just switched tables. 🔄 On August 13, the S&P 500 closed at 7,798.99 — a fresh all-time high. On the exact same day, Bitcoin spot volume scraped in at just $1.19 billion, its quietest session since 2019. One market prints a record. The other freezes at a seven-year cold. Same capital pool, same day, two completely opposite verdicts. 📊 So where did the money actually go? The tape is loud: SanDisk ripped 13.7% in a single session, Micron climbed 4.2%, and Intel raised $19.Weekend Counterfeit Review
The biggest feature of the market this week was not the "full launch of knockoffs," but the beginning of structural capital rotation. Recently, $BTC and $ETH ETF funds have clearly warmed up, but $BTC is still fluctuating around $63,000, indicating that institutional funds are more allocated rather than fully entering high-beta assets.
So, next week I'll pay more attention to the following areas:
$SOL — Leading public chain beta
SOL is the core liquidity asset among altcoins. If BTC regains the 64,000 level, risk appetite will increase, and SOL will often be the first batch to receive funds. The focus is not on chasing breakouts, but on observing pullbacks with shrinking volume and then renewing attacks with increased volume.
$LINK—Infrastructure + RWA
LINK's biggest advantage is that its narrative does not rely on a single market; Oracle, RWA, and on-chain data infrastructure all have real needs. In CoinDesk-related indices, LINK is also a very weighted asset, indicating it still holds a strong position in the institutional index system.
$SUI — High Beta public chain
SUI is a flexible asset I like to observe. It's not a defensive asset, but a typical amplification for risk appetite. If BTC stabilizes and ETH breaks out first, SUI may see a catch-up rally; But if the market weakens, its drawdown will also be significantly amplified.
$AAVE — DeFi direction
If funds continue to diverge from BTC/ETH into DeFi in the future, AAVE is worth watching. Compared to pure concept coins, its advantage lies in relatively clear track and product logic. Currently, AAVE is also an important weight in the DeFi sector in institutional indices.
$TAO. $RENDER — High flexibility in the AI sector
These two are offensive observation targets. TAO leans toward decentralized AI/computing power, while RENDER leans toward GPU computing infrastructure. In CoinDesk's related index allocations, both are included in the AI/computing sector, indicating that this narrative still attracts capital.
My next week's ranking
Steady observation: $LINK, $SOL, $AAVE
Offensive Observation: $SUI, $TAO, $RENDER
But here's a key condition:
BTC does not break below 60,000 + ETH regains the 1900 mark and breaks through 1955 + altcoin trading volume increases simultaneously.
Only when these three conditions appear is it true risk-on (risk appetite reversion).
If $BTC continues to hover between 60,000 and 64,000, the most likely thing to happen for altcoins is a rotational market: today $SOL, tomorrow AI, the day after DeFi. It seems like opportunities are everywhere, but in reality, funds are just "switching places for one shot" between different sectors.
So don't chase a coin just because it rose 10% over the weekend. What truly stands out are stocks with narrative, liquidity, and capital support, but not yet accelerating.
Next week's core observation pool: $SOL, $LINK, $SUI, $AAVE, $TAO, $RENDER.
The above is market structure analysis and does not constitute a buy recommendation
#交易之声: Your experience deserves to be heard $SNDK DK was slashed 8% after the earnings report to a 22% increase later on by investors.
In just two weeks, the market gave completely opposite pricing for the same company. On the day of the earnings report, revenue was 8.965 billion yuan and gross margin was 84.6%, both record highs, but it fell 6.81%. On investor day, there wasn't much new to say, but it actually rose 13.67%, and the next day rose another 7.39%.
What's the difference? On the night of August 5, the market saw the peak of the storage cycle. On August 13, the market saw the logic of AI storage—eight long-term contracts locked in 93.9 billion, HBF tape-out, and the profit return path was provided. Simply put, before, SanDisk's value depended on whether NAND prices would rise; now the market is starting to calculate it as an "AI infrastructure provider."
Market closed over the weekend, closing at 1641, with an intraday high of 1667. Whether it can hold this position on Monday is more important than who sets a 2200 target price. #闪迪投资者日后股价大涨, long-term targets remain to be verified #OpenAI与Anthropic估值竞赛升温
I believe the current valuation logic of the AI industry is undergoing a brutal test from technological belief to commercial realization. The latest data from OpenAI and Anthropic shows that only giants with self-sustaining ability can cross the death valley of computing power investment
Judgment is based on the dual validation of revenue doubling and profit inflection points
OpenAI's commercialization accelerates Annualized revenue surpassing $40 billion, doubling compared to the end of 2025. This is not just user growth, but also a comprehensive explosion of AI programming software, enterprise-level subscriptions, and new commercialization businesses
Anthropic's astonishing breakthrough Q2 preliminary revenue exceeded $11.5 billion, a quarter-on-quarter increase of over 143%. More importantly, it recorded positively adjusted operating profit. In the generally cash-burning AI field, achieving profitability means its unit economic model is now running and no longer relying solely on financing for funding
Shift in investment logic: Transmitting the primary market to the secondary market. Anthropic's IPO pricing will become the new anchor. If it successfully supports a $2 trillion valuation, it will directly push the valuation ceiling of AI chips, data center infrastructure, and the entire technology sector. If the IPO discount or price falls below the issue price, it will trigger a chain reaction
Changes in Stock Selection Criteria For investors, AI startups that focus solely on storytelling and without revenue implementation face significant risks. Funds will tend to flow more toward leading players like OpenAI and Anthropic, who already have scaled revenues and can see profit paths
@OKX planet A review of a $PUMP PUMP short order.
PUMP rose from 0.002245 all the way up to 0.002986, then after a surge it started to pull back noticeably.
I entered shorts near 0.002835.
Why empty?
It's not because it feels like a drop is coming, but rather that the structure is weakening over the 1-hour chart:
The price has fallen below the EMA10 and EMA20, the moving averages have started to turn downward, MACD bearish momentum has been released again, and the previous high of 0.002986 has yet to be broken.
So the logic behind this deal is simple:
After the rally ends, wait for the structure to weaken, then pull back for a while.
Currently, the price is at 0.002768, which is close to the short-term support near 0.00275.
So now, I can't get carried away.
It broke below 0.00275 and rebounded without rebounding; continue to watch 0.00270 and 0.00265.
If it returns to around 0.00283, the logic of this short position will start to fail.
The most important thing in trading isn't always guessing the right direction, but rather:
Know why you enter before entering;
After entering the arena, know under what circumstances to admit mistakes;
When making money, know when to stop.
This order is currently profitable, but I won't get arrogant just because I make money.
Deal the deal well first, then discuss the returns.
Let's all progress together.#消费动能转弱, September policy remains constrained by inflation
I'm Ci Ge. This chart is packed with information: retail data, inflation expectations, and screenshots of liquidations all point to the same conclusion: high leverage is being targeted by the market.
Retail Data: Consumption momentum is weakening
Retail sales in July fell 0.6% month-on-month, while the market expected a 0.1% increase, marking the largest drop since May 2025. The University of Michigan Consumer Confidence Index fell from 55.2 to 51.0, below the expected 54.5. The demand side is cooling down, continuing the cooling CPI and PPI, and consumers' ability to accept prices is weakening.
But inflation expectations rose from 4.2% to 4.3%, consumer confidence is declining, inflation expectations are rising, and consumers are starting to face higher price expectations with less money. This combination is harder to manage for the Fed's policy path than simple employment or inflation data; it neither cuts interest rates to stimulate demand nor allow inflation expectations to spiral out of control.
Impact on BTC: Short-term neutral bullish bias, medium-term suppression
Weakening consumer data further reduces the urgency for the Fed to continue raising rates, putting pressure on the dollar and Treasury yields, which is marginally positive for BTC. However, rising inflation expectations mean the high interest rate environment may persist, and the valuation ceiling for risk assets remains. Weakening consumer data combined with rising inflation expectations creates a policy dilemma.
This screenshot of the liquidation is the truly worth seeing
Cross-margin 10x leverage, forced liquidation, loss of 5197.77 U, investment return of negative 866.34%, position reduced from a peak of 25,198 to zero. This is a typical case: using 10x leverage to be targeted during volatility.
After retail data is released, short-term volatility intensifies, and high-leverage positions become the main target for market harvesting. When the futures market is filled with high-leverage orders, prices are actively pushed into liquidation-dense zones, wiping out those leveraged positions before returning to normal movement. Retail investors think they are betting on direction, but in reality, they are passively cooperating with the market to complete the liquidation process.
Operationally
Reduce the leverage multiple; within 5 times is reasonable; above 10 times during market volatility, it's like risking your life. Set stop-loss settings. In this screenshot, from opening to forced liquidation, there is no obvious stop-loss mark, which is the fundamental reason for principal loss loss. Light positioning, high leverage plus full position means handing control over account control to market fluctuations.
The lesson in this screenshot is more valuable than any market analysis. Leverage can amplify gains or accelerate zeroing. You can misjudge direction, but position management must not be wrong. The market never follows someone just because they have added high leverage, but it will always prioritize liquidating those who have leveraged high. Live first, then talk about making money. When the next trend begins, there is still principal in the account.
Ci Ge finished speaking. Take a closer look $BTC $ETH $SNDK SanDisk$SNDK skyrocketed from 1200 to 1600, with a complete review showing that news is the biggest killer 🔥
This time, I was forced into a liquidation on SanDisk and suffered a big loss. Afterwards, I reviewed all the news and market data to understand the logic behind this explosive surge.
Core trigger: On August 13, Investor Day, a long-term outlook far exceeding market expectations was released
1. Explosive financial goals
The company has set targets for fiscal years 2028-2030, aiming for gross margin to reach 80%, operating profit margin to 75%, and maintain high double-digit revenue growth—a very aggressive expectation for the storage cycle industry. It also promises that after completing business investments, 100% of the remaining free cash will be returned to shareholders, along with large stock buybacks, directly attracting institutional funds.
2. Lock in long-term major client orders to mitigate cyclical risks
Long-term capacity agreements have already been signed with eight leading companies, with most of the shipment volume locked in in the coming and the following years.
In the past, memory chips were cyclical stocks with sharp rises and falls; now, by locking in prices through long-term orders, they have greatly smoothed out industry cyclical fluctuations, prompting institutions to directly revalue them.
3. AI Storage Stories Continue to Increase Investment
Focusing on HBF high-bandwidth flash technology, targeting the AI inference market, the AI large model KV Cache is driving massive flash demand. The market is optimistic about taking a share of the market share that originally belonged to HBM, opening up new possibilities.
4. Investment banks collectively raise target prices
Goldman Sachs maintained a buy position with a target price of 2200, and some institutions set a target price of 2800. Bullish research reports flooded in, off-exchange long funds rushed in, and the spot price surged sharply, driving the contract from 1200 to around 1600.
Now let's look at the 4-hour candlestick chart:
The price followed the supertrend line upward, with the RSI surging to 79 and the severe overbought rate. Trading volume continued to expand, and bullish funds kept pouring in.
At that time, I ignored this major event, relying on the market to feel like I was short against the trend, completely ignoring fundamental catalysts, and was directly forced out by news reports.
Profound Lesson:
When trading stock contracts, major investor days, or financial report outlooks, you absolutely cannot rely on candlestick intuition to bet on direction.
Technical aspects must follow news and major event windows; high leverage must be avoided, and do not subjectively predict that if good news materializes, "all the good news will be gone." When positive news exceeds expectations, the market will directly surge violently.
Remember not to go head-to-head with market sentiment. $SNDK Short-term Complete In-Depth Analysis (1-7 Trading Days)
The stop-loss is set at 1670, currently the first target is 1560, and the rest will be monitored slowly
1. Current Status of Market Capital and Chips
Overall, the 24-hour trend showed a slight net outflow. From the perspective of capital structure breakdown, after a rebound, some high-level institutions and whale whales are cashing out profits in batches on the rally. They are not massively selling off the market but have stopped actively chasing highs, with more investors reducing positions during the rebound.
Retail investors are currently the main holding force. After prices fall, bottom-fishing and buying orders are more active, and the logic of many retail investors in gaming and storage AI continues to ferment. On the contract side, long positions remain heavily accumulated, which is a hidden risk. If the price turns downward, concentrated liquidations by bulls will amplify the decline.
Trading volume has clearly shrunk compared to the previous explosive phase. During the US stock market open, SNDK volatility is amplified; During the US market close, the crypto market prices alone, liquidity declines, and buying slippage increases significantly. In summary: there is a strong fundamental driving force, but a lack of new large off-exchange capital inflows, mainly focusing on stock trading.
2. Distribution of technical chips, pressure, and support
Pressure range
1. First short-term resistance: $1640-1670
This is a recently traded area, with a large amount of short-term trapped chips. To effectively break upward, trading volume must be amplified, while US SanDisk's stock price remains strong and the BTC market cannot deteriorate. If volume cannot keep up, once this range is reached, selling pressure is very likely to occur, leading to a consolidating pullback.
2. Second major rebound target: $1780-1820
This is one of the stronger rebounds in this round and also a high ground for chips in the early stage. To reach this level alone, it is almost impossible to rely solely on retail funds within the crypto market. There must be external catalysts: the storage sector collectively continues to surge, the industry releases orders or positive earnings guidance, combined with BTC maintaining a volatile and slightly strong environment, and multiple conditions resonating to have a chance to reach this point.
Support range
1. Short-term first lifeline: $1,480-1,500
This is an important defensive position for this round of rebound. As long as the price remains above this support and the short-term rebound structure is not broken, the market still retains the possibility of testing resistance levels upward. Even if a pullback occurs, it tends to be more volatile and shaking out.
2. Trend breakdown level at $1420
If the volume drops below 1420, it means this round of rebound has failed. A large number of trapped positions above will continue to emerge, and the market will enter a deeper correction. The next support is in the 1330-1350 range.
III. Short-term Three Scenario Simulations (1-7 days)
Scenario 1: Optimistic Rebound Market (Harsh Conditions)
Catalyst conditions: U.S. stocks such as SanDisk and the storage sector continue to strengthen, and the logic of AI storage demand is still recognized by the market; The BTC market remains volatile, with no significant breakout; Meanwhile, SNDK's trading volume has expanded simultaneously, with incremental funds entering the market.
Market path: After a pullback to support, stabilize, then push upward to 1640-1670. If sentiment is strong enough, it can be seen as 1780-1820.
⚠️ Key reminder: If the rally continues to shrink in volume, it is a low-volume rise, often a bullish incentive, and the risk of a subsequent pullback is high.
Scenario 2: Neutral oscillation, highest probability
No major positive or negative news has been released. On one hand, the market follows US stocks in SanDisk's movements, while on the other hand, it is shaken by sentiment in the crypto market. Overall, it oscillates between 1480 and 1670, grinding chips.
When US stocks have positive news, they pulse upward to test resistance; After the positive news is realized, major investors take profits on rallies, causing prices to fall back to support areas and repeatedly go back and forth. Most of the time, the market is a news-driven volatile market, with limited probability of sustained sharp gains on one side.
Scenario 3: Pessimistic pullback market
The triggers fall into two categories: First, divergence in the US storage sector, with institutions beginning to take profits, leading to a significant pullback in SanDisk's US stocks; Second, the BTC market broke downward in the crypto market, driving a collective sell-off across the entire RWA token sector.
If the price breaks below the 1480-1500 lifeline with increased volume and further loses below 1420, the rebound trend will be completely destroyed, opening up downside space to test the 1330 level.
4. Short-term Catalysts and Risk Points to Focus On
Positive news catalyst
1. The performance of the US storage sector (Micron, Western Digital) will directly drive SanDisk's stock price, which in turn will be passed on to the SNDK mirror token;
2. Industry News: Long-term storage orders for AI data centers and price increases for flash products have stimulated sector sentiment.
Risks and hidden dangers
1. Cyclical divergence risk: Storage is a highly cyclical industry. Some institutions believe this round of rally has already priced in, and once bearish sentiment ferments, US stocks may pull back, directly dragging down SNDK;
2. Dual market risks: Even if US stocks are trading sideways, if the crypto market weakens, the RWA token sector often experiences independent declines;
3. Liquidity risk: After the heat fades, the depth of the order book decreases, leading to significant slippage;
4. Issuance and fulfillment risk of mirror tokens themselves.
5. Market summary
The short-term fundamental logic remains, but funds are no longer blindly pushing prices up; big players cashing at high prices have become the norm. Most likely, the price is oscillating back and forth between support and resistance. Don't just chase at high prices based on story logic; trading volume, US stock sector, and BTC market jointly determine how far it can go in the short term.In the past two days, there was an update in the Hyperliquid community that looked quite "programmer," which many people underestimated. On August 12, Hyperliquid founder Jeff Yan revealed on the official Discord that, based on feedback from Builders, HIP-1 will add a new function controlled by asset deployers: scaleWei { token, totalWei, referenceToken, systemAddress }. If you just glance at these parameters, most people's first reaction would be: another upgrade to underlying functionality. But if you translate code language into financial language, the situation suddenly becomes completely different. Hyperliquid is trying to directly integrate Corporate Actions—such as dividends, stock splits, mergers, asset repricing, and sell-as-you-go airdrops—into the underlying on-chain asset account system. This might be the real highlight of this update. It is important to emphasize first: Hyperliquid has not officially announced that "all future stock tokens will support dividends." What is currently announced is underlying capabilities, not specific products. But the truly significant changes in the capital markets often happen precisely in this seemingly inconspicuous infrastructure layer. The biggest problem with on-chain stocks in the past wasn't whether they could be tradedDecentralized? OKX announces suspension of support for transactions with 16 other crypto platforms! Violators may face wallet restrictions.
OKX founder Xiao Z often prides himself as a "promoter of decentralized finance," emphasizing that cryptocurrencies can bypass traditional financial gatekeepers to achieve financial inclusion.
But today's business reality undoubtedly contradicts that original ideal.
1. Three levels of decentralization:
1. Architectural decentralization:
How many physical nodes are operating in the system (servers, validators)
2. Political decentralization: Who holds control and decision-making power
3. Logical decentralization:
Whether the system's interface/rules are unified and predictable
2. This move violates the spirit of decentralization:
1. Cryptocurrencies should pursue "permissionless, intermediary-free" fund flows, but OKX, as a centralized exchange, actively filters and blocks fund flows from specific platforms, essentially bringing the traditional financial "blacklist" mechanism into the crypto world.
2. Users' freedom to transfer assets is restricted unilaterally by the exchange's compliance policies, which contrasts with the Bitcoin whitepaper's emphasis on a "peer-to-peer electronic cash system that does not rely on trusted third parties."
3. This kind of blacklist mechanism may be abused or lack transparent appeal processes.
For users, choosing platforms carefully has become a primary consideration. OKX's transparency and completeness in compliance layout are also reasons it has been regarded as more user-friendly in recent years. After all, the bridge between users and platforms is trust, not unilateral actions.
$OKB At this stage, Hyperliquid HIP-4 is only considered a semi-finished product
The number of active HIP-4 markets has dropped to single digits, with daily trading volume halved and halved again to just $400,000–$500,000
Previously, Validator deployed Outcomes markets completely free, and with the World Cup hot event ending, there was even less motivation to enter new markets
With the introduction of HIP-3-like models into the event contract market, we can expect to see mature deployers deploying a large number of HIP-4 markets
Although overall trading volume in the forecast market is declining, the launch of event contracts for ultra-short price rise and fall predictions on CEXs has become an inevitable trend
It is speculated that the short-term price movement predictions in crypto will be extended to tradFi targets like commodities and stocks#消费动能转弱, September policy remains constrained by inflation
American consumers are starting to struggle, but the Federal Reserve may still be reluctant to back down.
Retail sales in July fell 0.6% month-on-month, while the market had expected a 0.1% increase, marking the largest drop since May 2025; In August, University of Michigan consumer confidence also dropped from 55.2 to 51.0. The weakening of both consumption and confidence indicates that the "demand" side of the U.S. economy is indeed starting to cool.
For BTC, this is naturally good news at first glance. With weak consumption and continued cooling inflation, if the dollar and short-term US Treasury yields fall further, market expectations for policy easing will flare up again. Gold will benefit first, and BTC may benefit sooner or later.
But I care more about another figure: the one-year inflation forecast rose from 4.2% to 4.3%.
This means the current U.S. economy is not simply a "recession trade," but an awkward combination: consumers lack confidence to keep spending, yet worry about rising prices.
So what BTC really needs to wait for next isn't continued retail sales declines, but whether 'cooling consumption + falling inflation expectations' can occur simultaneously.
If both happen simultaneously, it would be a true shift in macro trends. Otherwise, the worse the consumption, the more likely the Fed is to fall into the awkward situation of "wanting to cut but not daring to."
I now prefer to understand this round of market trends as: BTC is waiting for a definite liquidity signal, rather than simply waiting for the economy to worsen.
$BTC $ETH AMD bucked the trend and surged 6.50% against the backdrop of a weakening U.S. stock market on August 14, closing at $514.39, mainly driven by institutional positions, bond issuance financing, and positive expectations for AI business. The current P/E ratio is about 130 times, indicating a relatively high valuation. Short-term gains may be significant, so attention should be paid to correction risks. Core drivers of the rise
Institutional New Positions: Tiger Global Fund newly acquired 674,000 AMD shares in Q2, directly boosting capital inflows.
Large-scale bond issuance: completed a $4.75 billion USD bond issuance, dedicated to AI infrastructure expansion (Instinct GPU and Helios rack-level platform).
AI business outlook is positive: Management reiterated accelerated growth in server revenue in the second half of the year, with EPYC processors and AI accelerator adoption rates continuing to expand.
Financial report fundamentals support: 2026 interim revenue of $21.789 billion (YoY +44.08%), net profit of $3.68 billion (YoY +132.76%).
Sector comparison
On the day, all three major U.S. stock indexes closed lower (Dow -0.20%, Nasdaq -0.28%, S&P -0.17%), and the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index fell 0.31%. AMD and Broadcom (-5.94%) showed a clear divergence, mainly due to institutional portfolio adjustments triggering internal capital rebalancing in the semiconductor sector.
Risk warning
The current P/E ratio is about 130 times, indicating a relatively high valuation; combined with year-to-date gains exceeding 140%, the short-term attention should be paid to profit-taking pressure.According to Nvidia's latest SEC regulatory filings, as of the end of Q2, the company indirectly held 122.8 million Class A shares of SpaceX, with a book value of about $21 billion, making it Nvidia's second-largest external equity investment position, second only to Intel. This equity stems from Nvidia's billion-dollar investment in xAI, which will automatically convert into SpaceX shares after SpaceX's acquisition of xAI is completed. Due to the stock price correction, the current market value of the secondary market for this position has fallen back to around $17.2 billion, resulting in an unrealized loss. Beyond capital ties, business synergy between both parties has further developed. At the earnings call, SpaceX made it clear that in the future, its terrestrial data center and orbital AI computing business will exclusively adopt Nvidia's Vera Rubin computing architecture, secure priority allocation for next-generation GPUs, advance joint development of Starmind AI1 computing power satellites, deploy data center-level computing power in low Earth orbit, and build an integrated space-ground AI computing network. For NVIDIA, this investment is more than just financial planning. Through equity binding, SpaceX has deeply locked in its massive GPU procurement needs, seizing the emerging space computing power track ahead of time and building a new growth curve distinct from traditional ground IDCs. For SpaceX, besides securing priority chip supply guarantees, it also leverages NVIDIA's technical capabilities to transform from an aerospace enterprise into an AI computing power service provider, supplying large-scale computing resources to external AI agencies. Institutions are warning of multiple risks at the same time. First, SpaceX's stock price has been highly volatile, with large equity investments全球股市逼近历史高位，为什么科技基金反而被赎回17亿美元？
现在的市场有点反常。
全球股票基金已经连续12周吸金，上周又流入约186亿美元，全球股市也一度刷新纪录。
但与此同时，科技行业基金却被净赎回约17亿美元，结束连续6周流入。
一句话翻译：钱没有离开股市，但开始不愿意全部挤在最热门的科技股里了。
更有意思的是，同一周债券基金吸金约180亿美元，货币基金流入约284亿美元，黄金基金也继续拿到资金。
所以我觉得现在不能简单理解成“风险偏好全面爆棚”。
更像是：投资者一边继续做多，一边已经开始给自己买保险。
这对Crypto也很值得观察。
如果全球风险资产继续创新高，但BTC始终拿不到同样强度的新增资金，那问题就不是宏观环境不好，而是资金暂时有更愿意去的地方。
#消费动能转弱，9月政策仍受通胀制约 #OpenAI与Anthropic估值竞赛升温 #NVIDIA持有SpaceX约210亿美元，AI协同受关注 $BTC $ETH $SNDK This wave of losses was brutal
Last night I stared at the position screen for a long time, my finger hovering over the close position button but I just couldn't press it, and in the end, the market pressed it for me.
All three orders blew up at the same minute, 2026-08-14 20:02:14.
The ALL0 order lasted 77 days, opened at an average price of 0.1676, closed at an average price of 0.3126. Looking at the price, it did go up, right? The direction was correct, wasn’t it? But I went all in with 10x leverage, and those spikes up and down in the middle shredded my position like a sieve, pushing the maintenance margin higher and higher until the liquidation price and market price were just a hair apart. 5197U gone, ROI -866%, people would think I was trading with 0.1x leverage if I told them.
The CAP order was even more ridiculous, opened on August 10, gone in four and a half days. Opened at 0.0518, closed at 0.0678, price clearly rose over 30%, but I lost 615U. You ask how I managed that? I don’t know either, just the magic of all-in leverage: unrealized profits weren’t enough to withstand the pullback, a retracement triggered a position reduction, and after reducing the position, the rebound had nothing to do with me anymore.
The GUA order in the middle lasted 49 days, opened at 0.1334 and closed at 0.0385. I really have no complaints here, look at how much the closing price dropped compared to the opening price, 73%, right? With 10x leverage fully applied, the liquidation line was hit countless times. The only reason it lasted 49 days was because unrealized profits supported it in the middle, and once those profits disappeared, so did the position.
I usually tell people "leverage is a tool, not a gambling device," but using it myself is no different from being a gambler. After reviewing these three months, I have one feeling: the directional judgment wasn’t really the problem, since the closing prices of ALLO and CAP were higher than their opening prices, meaning the trend judgment was correct. But the combination of all-in mode + high leverage + no hard stop loss is a dead end. The GUA one was purely a product selection issue; this thing has shallow liquidity, and a big order causes slippage that eats up several points.
After closing the positions around 2 a.m., I looked at my account, then went to the kitchen to get a glass of water, and when I came back, I closed the screen again. It’s not that I felt very bad, but this feeling of "I should have gotten out earlier" is more annoying than the loss itself.
Have you guys experienced forced liquidation recently? Let’s talk in the comments so I can find some psychological comfort.
$ALLO $CAP Before Monday's opening, the market still viewed SanDisk with some old habits: "Storage chips can never escape cyclical fate." But after Investor Day ended, this valuation logic was being quickly torn apart. 🚨 SanDisk's stock price surged sharply today, and the obvious reasons are obvious: rising AI and storage prices, and soaring demand. But what truly surprises the market is the signal hidden in the management's PPT that most people overlook—they are the first to boldly draw their profit curve to 2030, and do so very aggressively. Let's first look back at the doubts on Wall Street over the past month. The profit surge in NAND storage this round is indeed astonishing, but in old memories, this industry has never escaped the cycle of "price hikes—expansion—overcapacity—price crashes." Even though SanDisk's gross margin is already ridiculously high, the market cautiously rates it as a "cycle peak," unwilling to continue imagining the profits for 2028 and 2029. But today, SanDisk has directly responded to this doubt. 📊 At Investor Day, the company presented a long-term model: FY2028 to FY2030, with revenue maintaining mid-to-high double-digit compound annual growth, Non-GAAP gross margin anchored at around 80%, and even more impressively, the operating margin target remains at around 75%. This isn't just empty promises; it's giving cyclical stocks structural wings. In the latest quarter, SanDisk's gross margin reached 84.6%, and operating profit surpassed the $7 billion mark. Previously, the market thought this was the peak, but now the management is telling you personally: this is not a one-time explosion in 2026,#CLARITY表决待定，SEC规则未落地 Clarity法案那个事，算是彻底凉了。
8月休会前没动静，全院表决已经推到9月15号。参议院多数党领袖图恩亲口确认的，等9月14号议员复会再说。
民主党那边提了条件——加更严格的伦理条款，主要针对特朗普家族约14亿美元的加密业务。共和党手里53席，法案需要60票，等于至少得拉过来7个民主党人。目前公开支持推进的只有2个。差太远了。
Polymarket上法案2026年通过的概率，从5月初的70%多，一路摔到14%。Bernstein直接说，如果法案过不了，市场可能有“膝跳反射”式的下跌。
9月15号如果还没动静，后面就是中期选举季，基本没戏了。
SEC那边更干脆。
原定8月15号的Reg Crypto规则提案会议，前一天晚上临时取消了。理由是“不可预见的日程问题”，新日期不说，等于悬着。加密行业两条路——立法推进和行政规则制定——全堵死了。
ETF这边也在跑。连续四天净流出，累计走了3.32亿。跟上周还在流入8.5亿完全是两个盘面。比特币从64,400跌到62,700，背后就是这个逻辑——政策真空，机构不敢动，资金先撤。
九月中旬之前，别指望监管面能给出方向。#闪迪投资者日后股价大涨, long-term goals remain to be verified
$SNDK 80% gross margin and 75% operating profit margin far exceed the historical levels of traditional NAND cycles, requiring continuous verification of structural demand, pricing power, and long-term contract execution driven by AI inference.
The NAND industry still faces cyclical risks; even with long-term contracts guaranteed, if demand or prices fall short of expectations, high profit margins may be under pressure. Currently, high expectations have raised the performance threshold, and there is a possibility of a correction.
I have to say, US stocks are really volatile right now. The trillion-dollar market cap is like a MEME stock. When will crypto $BTC $ETH make a break?Goldman Sachs plans to bid up to $2.25 billion to acquire ETF management company NEOS. On the surface, it looks like an expansion of actively managed ETFs, but in reality, it seems more like an early move to position itself in the Bitcoin "yield generation" track.
NEOS's BTCI has a scale of about $1.1 billion. Its core strategy is holding Bitcoin-related ETPs while selling call options, attempting to convert BTC's volatility into monthly distributed cash flow.
Spot ETFs solve the problem of how institutions can compliantly and conveniently buy $BTC .
Yield ETFs aim to solve whether you can continuously earn income while holding BTC.
This is very attractive to traditional capital, but the cost is clear: while selling calls earns premiums, it may also mean missing out on some of the big price surges.
I think this is where Wall Street will truly compete in the next phase. The future competition won't just be about "who helps clients buy BTC," but about who can turn BTC into a yield product more familiar to traditional capital.
BlackRock's BITA currently has a scale of about $59 million, still significantly behind BTCI. Goldman Sachs's direct acquisition this time is less about favoring a single ETF and more about not wanting to miss the step of $BTC moving from "asset allocation" to "yield tool" $BTC #消费动能转弱，9月政策仍受通胀制约
Talking about the topic #消费动能转弱，9月政策仍受通胀制约#, I took a look at the market and data from the past couple of days, and honestly, it's a bit laughable and frustrating.
On Thursday, when the US Census Bureau released retail data, I happened to be watching the market. July retail sales dropped 0.6% month-over-month, while the expectation was a 0.1% increase. How big is this gap? It's like you expected a raise this month, but not only did you not get one, you actually got docked. Auto and online sales were the main drags; auto dealers fell 1.8%, and non-store retailers dropped even more sharply by 2.2%. Excluding autos and gasoline, sales still fell 0.2%. Consumption accounts for 70% of US GDP, so when this data came out, the US dollar index immediately dropped to a one-week low of 99.506.
Then I looked at CPI and PPI: July CPI year-over-year was 3.4%, core CPI was 2.5%; PPI was flat month-over-month, core PPI rose 0.2%. Inflation is indeed easing, but still far from the 2% target. Retail sales collapsed but inflation is still lingering, this combination is quite contradictory.
Logically, weaker employment + easing inflation = cooling rate hike expectations = positive for risk assets. The CME rate hike probability dropped from 55% a week ago to 32.4%, looks good, right? But look at what BTC is doing — it fell to 62,773 yesterday, down 1.24% in 24 hours. After the inflation data came out, BTC didn’t even touch 64,000 before being pushed down.
The market situation now is quite surreal. QCP says geopolitical risks and high oil prices have overshadowed macro positives, Brent crude is still hovering around $88. I think the more realistic reason is — liquidity is gone. Spot BTC daily trading volume dropped to 1.19 billion, the lowest since 2019. On the ETF side, there was a net outflow of 131 million on August 13, led by ARKB and FBTC. With this kind of volume, any big move by large funds can push prices around easily, making technical analysis all noise. You can draw support and resistance all day, but one redemption order from institutions can wipe it all out.
And there’s an even more frustrating aspect — the Fed itself hasn’t figured out what to do next. Barkin says hold steady but warns of inflation risks, while Harker says "we need to act now." The doves and hawks are arguing like a noisy market. The meeting is only on September 15-16, and we still have to wait for another round of new inflation data; all expectations are hanging in the balance.
Honestly, I’m keeping my position very light now. In this kind of market with conflicting macro signals and liquidity drought, chasing rallies or panicking sell-offs is just giving money to market makers. Those who chased longs probably felt it hard yesterday, with most long positions liquidated. I made the same mistake before, thinking good data meant a rally, but the market taught me a lesson.
Let’s wait for the Jackson Hole meeting at the end of the month and see what Powell and the others say. Until then, I’ll just stay put, cut losses when needed, and rest when needed.
How about you? Did the market take you down this week? Let’s chat in the comments, let me see if anyone had it worse than me. In the same macroeconomic test, US stocks delivered perfect scores, while BTC was still standing there at 63K, lost in thought—last night's combination was truly dramatic. 📊 PPI came in below expectations→ inflation pressures eased→ US Treasury yields fell in response→ rate cut expectations heated→ US stocks surged to record highs. The textbook-level 'macro positive transmission chain' is moving smoothly with incredible progress. But what about BTC? 👇 Around 63K, it remains completely unmoved. Don't rush to say "ready to go"—these words sound comforting but are actually dangerous. What's truly worth pondering is: in the past, when this level of macro warmth blew, BTC was always the first risk asset to jump up and lead. And now? US stocks hit record highs, yet BTC didn't even bother to show any decent fluctuations. What does this indicate? The market's pricing logic is splitting. The US stock market holds too many cards: the AI revolution supports imagination, corporate profits are solid, buybacks keep coming, institutional funds line up to enter the market—every logic reinforces itself. The biggest problem with BTC may not be "too much good news," but rather the most striking sentence: good news arrives, and then what? Who wants to buy? 🤔 So what I'm watching next isn't the PPI, not the CPI, and not the mouths of Fed officials. It all depends on one thing: if the US stock market continues to treat new highs as the norm and long-term yields keep falling, can BTC ride this wave with a high-volume bullish candle, decisively reclaiming 64K and 65K, or even try to touch 66K? If the overall macro environment昨晚我又被市场狠狠教育了一课。手里那张SanDisk的空单还挂着，本来想着美光财报那波已经把存储板块的预期打得差不多了，借点空头仓位吃个回调，结果好家伙，一根大阳线直接把我砸懵了——盘中一度飙到+17%，收盘还涨了13.67%，海力士和美光也跟着往上窜。那一刻我盯着屏幕，突然觉得不是我在交易，是市场在交易我。 那这波暴涨到底图啥呢？说白了，SanDisk给市场画了一张又大又圆的饼，而且这张饼还带奶油。人家在投资者大会上直接亮出三个“定心丸”：先是喊出2028到2030年营收保持双位数增长，毛利率朝着80%奔，自由现金流利润率50%——这数字漂亮得我这老韭菜看了都忍不住舔屏。然后又说产能投资完了之后，剩下的现金全部分给股东，回购加分红，摆明了告诉市场“我不搞无序扩产那套”。最狠的是第三招，把AI存储的叙事从训练直接切换到推理，说未来大模型推理需求会引爆企业级闪存，2030年市场规模要起飞，还搬出个高带宽闪存HBF的新技术路线。好家伙，一套组合拳下来，空头们跑得比谁都快。 说回市场逻辑，这波反弹本质上是“超跌反弹”加“空头踩踏”的经典配方。其实SanDisk财报出来之后，市场一直担心存储周NVIDIA actually holds $21 billion worth of SpaceX
Recently, NVIDIA disclosed an interesting holding: as of the end of June, the company held nearly 123 million shares of SpaceX, worth about $21 billion. This investment originally came from NVIDIA's investment in xAI, which was later merged into SpaceX, making NVIDIA a direct shareholder in SpaceX.
I think what is truly worth watching isn't the $21 billion, but that the two companies are now becoming increasingly intertwined.
Just a few days ago, Musk said that SpaceX's future AI infrastructure will fully adopt NVIDIA architecture, including the next-generation Vera Rubin, and SpaceX expects to acquire a significant portion of NVIDIA's GPU production capacity next year. SpaceX's own goals are also quite ambitious, planning to expand AI computing power from about 1.4GW now to over 10GW by 2027.
This means NVIDIA is both a shareholder in SpaceX and its most important chip supplier for expanding AI.
The bigger SpaceX AI grows, the more NVIDIA benefits not only from its holdings but also from GPU orders. These two are increasingly tied to the same AI main line.
#NVIDIA持有SpaceX约210亿美元, AI collaboration is gaining attention
$NVDA $SPCX $TSLA $SNDK 站上1600之后，我想的已经不是“涨不涨”，而是“还能不能涨”。
那天涨13.7%，第二天没跌。五天涨了35%。这个速度，哪个大盘股身上，都算极端。
涨的逻辑，已经很清楚：AI存储需求、长期高利润率指引、超额现金返还。每一条单拿出来，都足够性感。
但问题从来不在逻辑本身。
问题在于：当所有人都能讲出同一个逻辑时，价格往往已经走在这条逻辑前面了。
闪迪给出的长期模型，从FY2028到FY2030，营收中高双位数增长，毛利率80%，运营利润率75%。如果全部兑现，确实撑得起更高的估值。但注意，这是FY2028到FY2030，不是下个季度，也不是明年。
市场现在做的，是把一个需要三到五年验证的故事，在五个交易日里先涨掉一半。
这就是预期和兑现之间的时间差。
这种时间差，在牛市里叫提前定价，在熊市里叫透支。
我不否认闪迪的基本面在变好。NBM协议锁定出货、超额现金返还、AI驱动需求结构变化，这些都是实打实的变化。但实打实的变化，也有一个实打实的价格。
1600美元上方的闪迪，已经把“好公司”和“好价格”拉开了一段距离。
有人问我现在怎么办。
我没动。
不是因为我不看好闪迪，而是因为我不喜欢在情绪最高、斜率最陡的时候，用真金白银去证明一个已经被市场反复讲述的故事。
长期目标待验证，这句话的重点不在“长期”，而在“待验证”。
验证需要时间，而时间会带来波动。波动，才是真正给出好价格的时候。
现在追进去的人，赚的是情绪的钱，不是验证的钱。
情绪的钱来得快，去得也快。
我宁愿等它回踩，等市场冷静下来，等长期目标从PPT变成一两个季度的实际数据。
那时候再谈仓位，才有意义。
涨得快，不代表走得远。
真正的好公司，是涨了之后还能再涨。
但前提是，你得在它涨之前，或者在它涨累了歇脚的时候，坐在车上。
而不是现在，在它五天涨了35%之后，才开始问能不能上车#闪迪投资者日后股价大涨，长期目标待验证 The indirect $BTC exposure of Norway's sovereign wealth fund rose to 11,549 BTC in the first half of this year, a year-on-year increase of 60.5%
It did not open an exchange account to buy $BTC directly, nor did it loudly proclaim on social media that "Bitcoin is the future." Most of the exposure comes from its holdings in Strategy (formerly MicroStrategy) stock—this accounts for about 9,914 BTC, approximately 86% of the total exposure. In addition, there are stocks of companies holding coins or strongly related to them, such as Metaplanet, MARA, Coinbase, Block, Tesla, and others
The interesting part of this is not "how many coins the Norwegian fund bought," but that traditional institutions are increasingly accustomed to gaining BTC risk exposure by buying stocks
For sovereign funds, pensions, and large asset managers, directly holding coins involves a bunch of issues like custody, compliance, auditing, and internal risk control; but buying stock in a listed company has mature processes, clear financial reports, and clearer responsibility boundaries. Thus, companies like Strategy have effectively become the "adapters" for traditional capital to enter BTC $BTC $OKB Prices continued to rise again today
I still see $247 for the long term
$OKB continued to climb today, recently reaching around $108, up nearly 6% in 24 hours, with gains exceeding 16% over the past 7 days, clearly outperforming the previously weak crypto market.
I'll keep taking this as usual.
Currently, OKB's total supply is fixed at 21 million, and it serves as X Layer's gas and core asset. As long as X Layer's DeFi, payments, and RWA continue to expand, I think OKB still has a story to follow.
I don't really care much about how the short-term market will shake. What I'm more interested in is whether this round can challenge the previous historical highs again.
My long-term goal is still $247, and I'll keep holding until it hits. If you're still trading $BTC, as if sovereign funds don't matter—stop now.
The retail side has been repeatedly fragmented by FOMO chasing and panic flights, while larger wallets are quietly rewriting the rules. The most painful part is that you realize that those "obvious" operations often happen before most traders accept the narrative.
Reports indicate that the UAE's sovereign wealth fund holds over $760 million in Bitcoin. This is not a random corporate fund movement. It is oil-backed capital directly exposed to $BTC, further reinforcing the view that accumulation at the national level is no longer just theoretical.
The bearish side thinks this may be exaggerated, already priced in, or just a small part of a large portfolio. That's right. But I'm more biased here, because sovereign wealth funds are time-scales of decades, not weekly candlesticks. If this mindset spreads, it could reshape how funds rotate between $BTC, $ETH, and the broader exchange ecosystem (like $).
Is this the beginning of the real-world sovereign Bitcoin race, or are traders overthinking how to interpret a single allocation?
#Bitcoin #CryptoNews #BTCSNDK is like a needle stuck to 1635, and my liquidation line at 1675 is like a rope hanging on a cliff. Why does this market always stab others in the back when they're afraid? While watching the market today, I kept thinking about one thing: on the surface, it looks like SNDK is just a thriller, but the underlying structure is actually more worth discussing—the density of derivatives contracts is quietly changing, and every time the price pushes up a bit, a layer of short stop-loss orders is stacked. This structure is unhealthy because once a chain of forced liquidations is triggered, the pullback can be faster than the rise. My account was down to 46u, and most of the trial-and-error costs had already been burned through. These 16 days felt like I had been soaked in market sentiment from start to finish. SNDK rebounded from its low point, but daily volume failed to keep up, yet frequent hourly spikes appeared, indicating that short-term funds are betting on direction rather than building trend positions with real money. There is also a bullish logic: if it holds above 1650, short covering will drive a second wave of impulse, since the liquidation zone above is not hard to sweep. But the risks are equally glaring—my position is close to the liquidation price, and this position game is like handing the key to market volatility. If your mood shakes even slightly, your account will be wiped out. Upon observation, the real signal is not the price itself, but changes in contract funding rates and open interest. If the rate turns positive and OI continues to rise, it indicates that new bulls are entering; Conversely, if OI drops and prices rise, it's a short-covering short-filled spark that won't last long. I decided not to rush to cut prices, setting a strict rule: if it falls below 1600, I'll leave, and don't go head-to-head with the market. The most expensive lesson in this market is that you never know which candlestick belongs to someone else$SNDK continued to surge after Investor Day, closing at $1,641.11 on August 14, up another 7.37% in a single day, bringing its market capitalization to about $257.7 billion. Previously, on August 13, Investor Day, the stock price had already risen by 13.7%. In other words, the money wasn't excited for a day after hearing the story, but rather repriced the company for two consecutive trading days. But I believe that most current market discussions about $SNDK remain at a relatively shallow level: AI drives demand for data centers, NAND prices are rising, enterprise SSD prosperity is improving, so SanDisk's performance exploded and stock prices rose. This logic is correct, but it doesn't explain why the market is willing to chase prices after such a huge surge. $SNDK What is really happening is not that demand for AI storage is intensifying, but that for the first time, the market is seriously considering that NAND, an asset defined for decades as a strong cyclical commodity, may be undergoing a restructuring at the business model level. These two are completely different valuation scales. If this is just one NAND supercycle, then the current $SNDK has entered a very dangerous position. But if Sandisk is successfully weakening the cyclical properties of NAND, then $1600 may not even mean this round of re-rating is over. The most counterintuitive part: stock prices keep rising, but forward earnings may actually get cheaper. Look at the income statement first. FY2026 Q4，S#加密估值转向收入, how is BTC priced?
Two pricing logics are now completely diverging.
Matt Hougan, Chief Investment Officer at Bitwise, raised a point that I think is more worth pondering than most market analyses—the way crypto assets are valued is changing, shifting from focusing on narrative to focusing on revenue.
For ETH and DeFi, this logic has already worked.
Ethereum's fee revenue in 2024 is about $2.5 billion, while Uniswap's annualized revenue exceeds $1.6 billion. Protocols are making money, and the market is starting to use discounted cash flow models to settle accounts. The token buyback and burn model is increasingly similar to traditional stocks—the more income, the more buybacks, the fewer circulating supply, and the stronger the price.
But BTC doesn't follow this logic at all.
BTC has no protocol income, no fee buybacks, no dividends, and no cash flow. Its pricing core is three things: ETF capital flow, macro interest rates, and institutional allocation ratios.
In recent weeks, ETFs have seen continuous net inflows, with BTC jumping from 62,000 to around 65,000. It's that straightforward, that simple.
Global debt has surpassed $400 trillion, and U.S. national debt is approaching $40 trillion. As fiat credit continues to be diluted, BTC's store-of-value narrative will not fail because of "no cash flow"; instead, it will become increasingly rigid.
So both sides went their separate ways.
On one hand, you can look at revenue, cash flow, and buyback rate—this approach applies to ETH and DeFi.
On one hand, watch ETF fund flows, macro interest rates, and institutional allocation—this approach only applies to BTC.
Two species, two different valuation logics—don't confuse them.Eliminating conflicts of interest to achieve true "neutrality" and service-oriented approach. In recent years, the crypto industry has followed a grassroots approach of "issuing coins first, building ecosystems later." However, with compliance endorsements like Base and the rise of traffic-driven L2s from big companies, the industry logic is shifting toward "first having a large number of real users and business scenarios, then naturally on-chain." Robinhood has ready-made global compliance licenses and tens of millions of high-net-worth retail users. It doesn't need airdrops to attract short-term "mercenary capital"—it comes with massive real traffic. The most successful blockchain infrastructure often makes users feel the blockchain doesn't exist, only enjoying the advantages of fast settlement, 24/7 transactions, and low costs brought by blockchain. Users come to Robinhood to buy stocks, manage finances, and allocate global assets, not to trade the Gas token on this chain. Johann Kerbrat made this statement marks that institutional-level blockchain applications are stripping away the "speculative bubble" and returning to technology and efficiency itself. For traditional financial giants following a compliant path, not issuing tokens is not only a form of self-protection but also a sophisticated strategic restraint—it allows Robinhood to leverage the technological dividends of blockchain without getting stuck in the cyclical speculative quagmire of the crypto world. $BTC $OKB $ETH The 4-hour structure at $2Z confirms strong momentum, but the key question is whether this is a sustainable trend or a temporary phenomenon caused by overheated leverage. If the current rally is driven by short squeezes on derivative positions rather than spot demand, further gains are likely to be limited by funding costs and the size of unsettled positions. Based on the original data, the market structure can be summarized as follows. - $2Z broke out of the 0.04725 low base, forming a strong uptrend on the 4-hour candle, and the current price is above the MA5 (0.05231), MA10 (0.05011), and MA20 (0.05140). - During the upward range from 0.04725 to 0.06052, trading volume increased to $5.54 million 2Z and 311,500 USDT, indicating that buying participation was confirmed as a real trade. - However, the 7-day (+2.51%), 30-day (-21.59%), 90-day (-36.89%), and 180-day (-26.66%) returns indicate that the medium- to long-term structure remains in a downward trend. In other words, crashed hard, and the slap came fast. Time to stand at attention and review.
Everyone thought Uniswap’s team, brand, technology, and solid mechanism design would easily crush these short-lived launchpads built on Uniswap’s own tech.
But Pools.Trade quickly overtook Pons and then got knocked back just as fast. That was a serious lesson for the market—and for Uniswap.
The key mistake? Who is the launchpad really serving?
Uniswap focused on lower fees, fairer launches, and deeper liquidity.