Orbit Post Sitemap

Trump's White House Summit Reiterates National Reserve: What Would Happen to the Market If the U.S. Really Designated Bitcoin as a Strategic Asset? Under the spotlight of the White House Crypto Summit, Trump once again raised a blockbuster topic that could reshape the global financial landscape. He publicly stated that the U.S. government had extensively discussed the possibility of accumulating a significant amount of Bitcoin and other core crypto assets, and reiterated the policy vision of advancing a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve, the CLARITY Act, and comprehensive stablecoin legislation. Although this statement is currently still at the stage of policy advocacy and political intent, with specific implementation details and a formal timeline yet to be officially announced, it has already sent ripples across global capital markets. Why does the concept of "national strategic reserves" have such a disruptive impact on the underlying valuation of Bitcoin? This marks that Bitcoin is undergoing an unprecedented "identity paradigm shift." Over the past decade, Bitcoin has evolved through various stages, from a geek experiment and dark web payment system, to retail speculation, and finally to institutional assets in Wall Street ETFs. But if the world's largest economy formally incorporates it into its sovereign balance sheet, Bitcoin's nature will be elevated to a "sovereign-level strategic reserve hard currency" on par with gold and crude oil. Once the United States takes a substantive step, it will trigger an irreversible "game theory domino effect" within the international financial system. Other sovereign states and central banks will inevitably be compelled to follow suit in allocating resources to avoid being at a disadvantage in the future global decentralized liquidity landscape. Whoever establishes reserves first will gain strategic control over this scarce asset at a lower cost. However, amidst the emotional fervor, # White House Summit: Trump Says He Discussed Buying BTC$BTC Behind the meme coin launcher hides 2 billion USD The ones who profit the most from launching meme coins are never the buyers, but those selling the shovels. Noah Tweedale, co-founder of Pump.fun, just said in an interview that the Pump Foundation has nearly 2 billion USD in treasury assets, most of which are held in stablecoins, with not a single SOL. This statement carries a lot of information. Think about it: this platform is the main gateway for this round of meme market, with thousands of new coins launched on it every day. Players chase pumps and dumps, participate in new launches and front-run, and every transaction fee ultimately flows into this treasury. 2 billion USD is a huge amount, higher than the total market cap of most altcoin projects, and it’s just the accumulated toll collected by a small platform. Another detail worth noting is that Tweedale said the foundation’s funds and the UK development company Baton Corporation are independent. Baton only handles Pump.fun’s development and operations, receiving a fixed annual fee of about 100 million USD. In other words, regardless of the platform’s market performance or players’ profits and losses, the development team takes a stable income of 100 million USD per year first, and the rest of the funds are held tightly by the foundation. Regarding the treasury holding only stablecoins and not touching SOL, this operation is quite intriguing. Meme players are gambling on the next 100x coin and risk going to zero if they lose; meanwhile, the platform converts every fee collected into stablecoins and locks them in, effectively isolating its income from coin price volatility. Players bear all the risks, while the platform profits rain or shine. This is not a launcher, it’s clearly a siphoning machine. Also, the 2 billion USD treasury figure has a bigger psychological impact on holders than expected. Many meme projects promote narratives of community governance and decentralization, but the model of a launch platform like Pump.fun is completely centralized. The money is in the foundation’s hands, and it sets the rules. Over the past six months, it has changed issuance fees and adjusted commission rates, and the community can only accept these changes after the fact. Looking at the whole meme ecosystem, this is actually a microcosm. Hot coins come and go, today’s leader might be zero tomorrow, but launch platforms, trading bots, and market makers are the real stable players who take most of the money. Retail investors gamble at the table, while the house collects the rake. This structure won’t change in the short term. And have you noticed? The co-founder specifically emphasized the separation between the treasury and the development company. This is a posture: the platform’s earnings and the developers’ are managed separately, with clear accounts. But the problem is, how the foundation’s money is spent, or whether it might suddenly buy coins launched on its own platform, the community has no control over. Holding 2 billion USD in the hands of a few means any move could be interpreted as negative news, which is a trust issue the meme ecosystem can’t avoid. So here’s the question: do you still plan to look for opportunities in meme coins? Knowing that every transaction fee is adding bricks to that 2 billion treasury, will you choose to keep pushing forward or change your approach? Share your strategies in the comments.On-chain RWA players surge by 80%, where did the money go? There was an unusually abnormal data point on-chain this week. The number of RWA asset holders skyrocketed by 79.74% in one month, reaching 2.3799 million, almost hitting 2.38 million. However, the total on-chain market cap is only $38.4 billion, up just 2.16% month-over-month. The number of people increased by nearly 80%, but the money barely moved. So what exactly are these new players buying? Or are they just warming up their pockets, waiting for some big move? The answer lies in a set of more detailed numbers. On the stablecoin side, the total market cap of $298.8 billion basically remained flat, but the monthly transfer volume rebounded to $5 trillion, up 4.84% month-over-month, finally halting the continuous decline. However, monthly active addresses actually dropped by 4.27%. Money is moving, but fewer people are active, indicating that funds have shifted from high-frequency rotation to cautious holding. Everyone is starting to hoard coins on-chain without moving them. On one hand, the total number of holders rose to 280 million, while on the other hand, activity declined. This divergence itself is a signal. Regulatory countdown is also underway, which is the real node that big money is waiting for. The U.S. Treasury Department has publicly solicited opinions on the GENIUS Act stablecoin rules, effective January 2027. By July 2028, stablecoins issued without a license will no longer be allowed to be sold to U.S. users. The Senate will vote on the CLARITY Act on September 15; both the White House and Trump are pushing it. The Coinbase CEO directly called for united efforts to get the bill passed. But there’s renewed debate on how to handle stablecoin rewards. The Senate Banking Committee chair said, "We thought it was resolved, but the issue has come back." This 600-plus-page bill is a sword hanging over the crypto market, and the verdict will come before the end of the month. More tangible than the bills is a major step of traditional finance moving on-chain. Franklin Templeton has obtained regulatory approval to put tokenized money market funds into traditional ETFs and mutual funds. This is the first time U.S. regulators have allowed digital-native products into mainstream fund systems. In plain terms, even if you don’t actively buy crypto assets, you might indirectly hold on-chain products through ordinary funds, effectively lowering the threshold. Nasdaq is even more direct, announcing a 23-hour trading system starting December 2026, clearly aiming to compete for liquidity with tokenized stocks. The two sides are set for a direct confrontation. Putting these events together, the logic is actually very clear. The 80% surge in RWA holders, the rebound in stablecoin transfers but decline in activity, are typical signs of building positions and accumulating strength. Incremental funds are entering the market but are still holding back, waiting for regulatory rules to be finalized. The GENIUS Act gives stablecoins a legal status, the CLARITY Act frames the entire crypto market, and giants like Franklin Templeton are putting on-chain assets into ordinary people's fund accounts. Every step is drawing off-chain funds onto the chain. For us traders, don’t expect these data to immediately drive prices up in the short term; they change the fundamentals in the medium to long term. But one thing is worth noting: when the September 15 vote lands, whether it passes or not, volatility will be significant. Are you holding stablecoins waiting for signals, or are you already fully invested at the peak? Share your position plans in the comments.Goldman Sachs, who verbally dissed Bitcoin, turned around and invested $2.2 billion Last January, Goldman Sachs' Chief Investment Officer of Wealth Management, Mossavar-Rahmani, publicly criticized Bitcoin, saying it generates no cash flow, has no profits, cannot diversify risk, and at best is a speculative trading asset they do not recommend. Those words are still fresh, yet this year the investment bank spent $2.25 billion acquiring an institution that profits from Bitcoin volatility, managing 19 options-based ETFs with a total scale of $30 billion. They say they don't want it, but their actions say otherwise. The acquired company, NEOS, has a particularly interesting product called BTCI. It doesn't buy Bitcoin directly but diversifies funds into 11 spot ETFs like BlackRock's IBIT and Fidelity's FBTC, then sells call options against these holdings. In simple terms, the fund holds the coins and sells others the right to buy the coins at a set price in the future, collecting the option premiums upfront. If the coin price stays flat, they keep the premiums for free; if the price surges above the strike price, the coins are delivered, but the premiums are already pocketed. Thanks to Bitcoin's high volatility, BTCI currently pays a monthly dividend of $7.75 per share, equating to an annualized yield of 27%. Sounds great, right? But the catch is in the latter part. This fund's net asset value has dropped 25.4% this year, with a drawdown exceeding 40% over the past 12 months, and part of the dividends actually come from returning principal. In other words, you give up the biggest gains in a bull market in exchange for a fixed cash flow to weather the bear market. Goldman Sachs has this figured out clearly: they don't need to predict price direction, only that the market is active and volatility is high, so option premiums keep flowing. And this is just the tip of the iceberg. In April this year, Goldman Sachs also spent $2 billion acquiring Innovator, which makes buffered ETFs. Combined with this deal, their assets relying on selling volatility amount to $61 billion. The entire derivatives income ETF sector has reached $180 billion in total scale, growing over 70% annually. Fidelity, Grayscale, and BlackRock are also active, competing to add staking features to Ethereum ETFs, taking 15% to 25% of staking rewards as management fees. JPMorgan is even more direct, using Bitcoin and ETH as collateral to lend dollars, cutting discount rates to 30% to 50%, paired with automated risk controls so the bank bears no risk even if the market crashes, while still collecting interest. The most ironic contrast is with native crypto firms like Bitwise, whose managed assets shrank from $15 billion to $9 billion this year, leading to layoffs, because crypto firms rely on management fees, and when coin prices fall and funds shrink, revenue collapses. Wall Street giants hold trillions in other assets, offsetting losses here and there, still steadily collecting fees. Looking back at Goldman Sachs' 2020 client presentation, it clearly stated that Bitcoin's high volatility does not constitute a viable investment logic. Now, they are precisely profiting from that high volatility. From JPMorgan's CEO calling Bitcoin a pet rock to now using it as collateral, we've seen this pattern of big institutions verbally dissing but practically embracing it many times. Ultimately, Wall Street's business doesn't depend on rising coin prices; they bet on market trading activity, with retail investors bearing all directional risk while institutions take guaranteed returns through fees. Understanding this logic explains why big institutions keep buying even as they criticize. The question now is, is this dual-sided structure good or bad for ordinary players like us? Share your thoughts in the comments.Bitcoin surged 20% in five days, shorts liquidated for $700 million The market at 5 PM today will likely be recorded in many traders' diaries. Bitcoin started around 74,000 in the morning, broke through 78,000 and 79,000, and is now at 79,200 USD, up over 10% in 24 hours and more than 20% in five days. Some in social circles are calling for a bull return, while others stare blankly at their floating losses on short positions. The same candlestick, two different lives. Let's look at the data first. According to Coinglass, $758 million was liquidated across the network in the past 12 hours, with $701 million from shorts and only $57 million from longs. Over 90% of liquidations were shorts, a typical one-sided short squeeze. Those who kept adding shorts above 70,000 were basically wiped out this afternoon. If you are still holding short positions, your position is riskier than you think at this level. More intriguing are the signals from the options market. Today, 24,000 BTC options and 149,000 ETH options expire, with a nominal value totaling $2.18 billion. The maximum pain point for BTC options is only 67,000 USD, and for ETH options 2,000 USD, but current prices are already above 79,000 and 2,400 respectively. The settlement prices far exceed the maximum pain points, a rare scenario this year, meaning bulls completely crushed bears on settlement day. Analysts at Greeks.live put it bluntly: the monthly realized volatility jumped 20 points in one day to 53%, implied volatility rose only 6%, and the put-side Gex is almost negligible. The market is fully bullish. In plain terms, the market is rising much faster than options pricing expected, disrupting the hedging strategies of option sellers, and short-term volatility may continue to increase. For swing traders, chasing highs at times like this is the biggest taboo. After a 23% rise in five days, the short-term deviation is already large. Above 79,000 is a previous dense resistance zone, and every bullish candle faces dual selling pressure from profit-taking and stop-loss recoveries. Instead of chasing now, it's better to wait for a pullback confirmation and see if 75,000 to 76,000 can form a new support platform. Of course, if you hold low-entry longs, holding is more important than frequent trading; don't scare yourself before the trend breaks. Looking at the bigger picture, this rally is actually more solid than previous ones. ETFs have had four consecutive days of net inflows, institutions continue to buy with real money above 70,000, and pre-market US crypto concept stocks are all strong, with MSTR up over 11%. Capital, news, and sentiment are rarely so aligned. But don't forget, the characteristic of a short squeeze is that it comes fast and goes fast. Once shorts are fully liquidated, the fuel is burned out. Whether the rally can continue depends on whether spot buying can keep up, not just contract position sentiment. Today Bitcoin broke 79,000. Are you holding longs or shorts? Did you profit from this wave or are you still waiting to break even? Let's discuss in the comments and see who is really making money this round.A few days ago, the whale who was showing off profits from long positions is now facing a floating loss of ten million on short positions. At 4:58 PM today, on-chain monitoring revealed a figure: the whale with the ID "Set 10 Big Goals First" holds $218 million in short positions, with a floating loss of about $10.08 million. Breaking it down for clarity: He holds 2,499.968 BTC in 5x short positions, with an average entry price of $74,746, a position value of about $183 million, and a floating loss of $8.73 million. Additionally, he has 15,000 ETH in 7x short positions, entry price $2,347.89, position value over $35 million, with a floating loss of about $1.35 million. Together, these two positions total just over ten million in losses. The issue is, this same ID did something else just two days ago. At that time, he posted a screenshot showing 5x long positions on 3,425 BTC with a floating profit of $13 million. The same person, same leverage, flipped direction in less than 48 hours, turning a $13 million profit into a $10 million loss on paper. The market gave him no breathing room. Bitcoin surged steadily this afternoon, breaking $78,000 at 4:48 PM and touching $79,200 at 4:59 PM, with a 24-hour increase of 10.61%. Ethereum simultaneously rose above $2,400, and BNB passed $680. On the US stock side, crypto-related stocks were even more active pre-market: MSTR up over 11%, COIN up 6.75%, CRCL up 6.42%. There was also an uncommon detail today. BTC and ETH options with a notional value of $2.18 billion expired and settled today. The biggest pain points were $67,000 for Bitcoin and $2,000 for Ethereum. An options analyst noted this was one of the rare days this year where the settlement price was significantly above the biggest pain points. Monthly realized volatility jumped 20% to 53%, while implied volatility only rose 6%. In plain terms, the market moved much faster than anticipated, making downside hedges almost negligible. So, what’s intriguing now isn’t how much he lost, but why he flipped from long to short at that level. Did he think the rally was too fast and needed a correction, or does he have other hedge positions we can’t see? When he posted the screenshot last time, many followed and trusted that direction. This time, he hasn’t said a word. Do you think such a high-profile whale showing off positions is still worth watching? Bitcoin surged to 77,000, and old coins collectively exploded—real buyers might be in Seoul Over the past dozen hours, the most unusual thing isn't Bitcoin hitting 77,000, but the trading volume in South Korea. According to The Block citing CoinGecko data, Upbit's 24-hour trading volume surged 223.8%, reaching $1.67 billion. More than double the volume in a single day on South Korea's largest exchange is no small matter. At the same time, Bitcoin stayed above 76,000, briefly touching 77,000, the highest level in over three months. If you only look at Bitcoin, it seems like a normal rebound. But when you look at the top gainers, the picture gets interesting. BCH rose 22.89% in 24 hours, XRP up 18.23%, ADA up 13.15%, Dogecoin up 10.1%, LINK up 8.91%. Conversely, Ethereum, although breaking 2400, only rose 5.8%, slower than Bitcoin. This list of gains almost perfectly matches the tastes of Korean retail investors. On Upbit, the most active coins have never been those new narrative tokens, but rather XRP, ADA, BCH, Dogecoin—so-called old coins. They consistently rank among the top in trading volume against the Korean won. In recent years, whenever Koreans concentrate their buying, both on-chain and market data show the same pattern: Bitcoin isn't necessarily the strongest, but these old coins always go crazy first. The so-called "kimchi premium" essentially reflects the sentiment thermometer of these retail investors. Now the thermometer has jumped. Looking at the fuel behind this rally: Coinglass data shows $758 million liquidated across the network in the past 12 hours, with long positions liquidated at only $57.16 million, and shorts liquidated at $701 million. In other words, over 90% of liquidations in these hours were shorts being squeezed out. This means part of the upward momentum isn't from new money entering but from forced buybacks by those who bet on a decline. This force is fierce but short-lived. Institutions also have real money involved. Bitcoin spot ETFs have seen net inflows for four consecutive days, with $606 million net inflow the previous day; Ethereum spot ETFs had $221 million net inflow in the same period. This is solid new buying, slow-paced but without leverage. So currently, there are at least three groups in the market. One is the shorts who got liquidated and are buying passively; another is institutional funds behind ETFs, buying slowly; and the third is the retail investors in Seoul who doubled the trading volume in a day, chasing old coins. These three groups operate at completely different paces. Shorts won't buy after liquidation, institutional inflows are slow and steady, and retail investors rush in when sentiment hits and flee just as fast. Historically, when Korean funds concentrate buying, the market outcome has never been singular. Sometimes it acts as the second engine of the rally, other times it’s the final leg. The difference isn't how much it rises on day one, but how much volume remains on day three and day five. If volume doubles one day and halves the next, the nature of the rally changes. What intrigues me more is another matter. In this round, institutions are slowly adding, shorts are being cleared, old coins are surging, while Ethereum and Bitcoin aren't the strongest gainers. When the biggest gains shift from mainstream coins to old coins, it usually signals funds moving toward higher-risk areas. This signal in the past could mark the start of heat diffusion or funds seeking an exit in the final phase. Do you think this baton is being passed to Seoul’s retail investors, or are institutions slowly rotating positions while the crowd is large? How do you plan to view those old coins that surged more than 20% in a day? People who have held on for three months and are only $300 away from breaking even are actually still at a loss. An address that has been repeatedly examined these past two days starts with 0x92; it is the largest BTC long position on Hyperliquid, with a position size of $96.3 million. This position was opened on May 20, with an average entry price of $76,117. When BTC surged to $76,000 today, on-chain observers calculated that it was only about $300 away from breaking even. Three hundred dollars sounds like the next candle could turn things around. But the reality isn’t that sweet. Monitoring by TradingBeats shows that over these three months, this position has paid $1.41 million in funding fees. In other words, even if the price really touches back $76,117, the screen might show no profit or loss, but the pocket has already lost $1.4 million. To recover that money, the price still needs to rise further. This is something many people don’t like to think about. Being number one in perpetual contracts is not an honor; it’s a bill. The bigger the position, the more money is deducted each settlement period. The longer you hold, the more you get charged. You think you’re waiting for a price level, but in reality, you’re gambling against time, and time charges a toll on your account every hour. Holding a $96.3 million position for three months costs as much as a house. Even more interesting is the second place on the same leaderboard. The address starting with 0x15 only started trading in early July, with a BTC long average price of $62,353 and an ETH long average price of $1,761, at 40x and 20x leverage respectively. Now the total unrealized profit exceeds $20 million, with $14.4 million on BTC and $6.32 million on ETH, and there is currently no sign of reducing the position. Both are long, both heavily leveraged, both optimistic about the future, but the difference is just a month and a half in entry time—one caught the peak, the other caught the bottom. After three months, one has just reached the break-even threshold, while the other has already gained $20 million in unrealized profit. When we usually discuss whether the direction is right or not, both of these traders were right; the only difference is when they got on board. The background is that BTC has risen from just above $64,000 to over $77,000 this week, with a 24-hour increase of more than 8%. Short-term sentiment went from cold to hot in just a few days. The most comfortable in this wave is not the one who held the longest, but the one who dared to enter when no one else was optimistic. The market never rewards hard work, only position. Looking back at the May 20 entry point, the market atmosphere then was completely different from now. Those who dared to heavily long at that price were mostly true believers. This address is rumored to be an agent of the so-called BTC OG insider whale. The name sounds mysterious, but the behavior is not much different from ordinary people—building a position at a high level, holding on stubbornly, and watching funding fees drain away day by day. So I really want to hear your thoughts. Holding a position for three months without cutting— is it faith, or unwillingness to admit that loss? If it were you, with the account just back to the cost line but already down over a million in fees, would you let go or wait for the next candle?Holding tokens lets you participate in the new Musk brain-machine interface company A platform for RWA trading called MSX Maitong dropped a bombshell yesterday. It announced that on August 31st at 6 PM, it will open the third round of Pre-IPO subscription. This time, the two exclusive companies are Musk's brain-machine interface company Neuralink and the US AI defense unicorn Anduril. In other words, these hard-tech unicorns that ordinary people can't access in the primary market have their subscription channels directly brought to the crypto space. The crypto community always likes to ride the wave of tech giants, and this time they boldly put Musk's most mysterious project on the subscription list, maximizing the hype. This kind of play actually has a threshold. To subscribe, it's not just about having money; you must first hold the platform token MSX. The amount you can buy depends on your effective MSX holdings. Simply put, to get on board with these star companies, you must first become a token holder of the platform. Binding the platform token with hot new projects is a design insiders understand well — essentially using scarce quotas to create demand for the token. What really catches attention is the performance of the previous round. MSX said the second round's Polymarket has already opened redemption, with a subscription yield of 33.3%. A leading prediction market completed a cycle on its platform, giving participants over 30% returns. Once this number came out, many started eyeing this round's Neuralink and Anduril. After all, these two are fiercely contested in the primary market, and Musk's halo combined with AI defense scarcity makes the name alone very enticing. But behind the excitement, there are several unavoidable issues. First, whether this Pre-IPO purchase is real equity or some kind of income certificate, and whether the information disclosure is transparent enough, ordinary people find it hard to see clearly. Second, requiring platform tokens to participate means you must bear the risk of token price volatility before subscribing, and the platform won't cover this risk for you. Third, primary market projects inherently have poor liquidity; if the lock-up period and exit mechanisms are not clearly stated, the so-called high returns are more like illusions. Interestingly, this kind of operation that brings US stock unicorns onto the blockchain is becoming a trend. Previously, there were various experiments with tokenizing stocks, and now even Pre-IPO is being pushed onto RWA platforms. For retail investors, the previously unreachable threshold seems lowered, but with a lower threshold, are there more pitfalls? What everyone is really watching is not those two companies themselves, but whether they can use this hype to get in before others. Would you hoard a platform token first to subscribe to Neuralink's new offering, or do you think this sounds exciting but you'd still weigh it carefully before making a move? The whole world is celebrating breaking 76,000, but this country is quietly moving coins From last night to early this morning, many people's phones kept ringing. Bitcoin surged all the way to $76,000, rising 8.71% in 24 hours, SOL also stood above $90, and on the altcoin side, ONG rose 109% in one day. The screen was full of red, and the group chat was flooded with screenshots. At this very moment, an inconspicuous on-chain transfer appeared. Onchain Lens detected that the government of the Kingdom of Bhutan transferred 490.87 BTC to a newly created wallet, which was worth about $32.74 million at the time. It's quite interesting that a country is moving coins at the hottest time in the market. First, why does Bhutan have so much Bitcoin? This small country nestled in the Himalayas has a population of less than 800,000 and is abundant in water. Relying on cheap electricity from hydropower plants, they have been quietly mining for several years and were once one of the sovereign states holding the most Bitcoin globally, and the outside world was completely unaware for a long time. What’s really worth pondering is the path. This is not the first time Bhutan has done this. In March this year, they dispersed 973 BTC on the same day to QCP Capital and two other addresses. QCP is a Singapore-based crypto trading and derivatives institution specializing in handling large OTC orders. In the April 9 transfer, besides the newly created exchange wallet, the old channel Galaxy Digital also appeared. In other words, there is more than one outlet for selling. The pattern is basically fixed: first transfer to a new wallet for transit, then disperse from the new wallet to exchanges or market makers. Since April this year, the frequency of such moves has clearly increased. Even more interesting is the amount. Compared to the peak in March, this time the scale of 490 BTC is significantly smaller. It’s no longer a one-time dump but cut into small portions, moving bit by bit. For a holder with a large stake, this approach is quite clear: they want to reduce holdings but don’t want to crash the price or let the market discover it too early. So the current picture is somewhat fragmented. On one side, retail investors cheer at 76,000, while on the other, a sovereign wallet is moving chips out. Retail investors look at the candlestick chart, sovereign states look at fiscal budgets and foreign exchange ledgers; these two groups are making decisions on completely different time scales. Of course, it can’t be concluded that they are liquidating just yet. Moving to a new wallet could also mean switching to a safer custody solution or internal account restructuring, which is common at the institutional level. The real answer depends on where these coins go next; if the next step is an exchange address, then the implications are entirely different. I’m more concerned about another question. Much of the momentum for this rally came from short squeezes and sentiment recovery, but how deep is the capital willing to buy at this level? When sovereign states start appearing on the seller list, who do you think will ultimately hold these chips?Where did the money go as yields remained unchanged after two rounds of market rescue? U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen did something quite awkward these past two days. She intervened twice to support U.S. Treasuries. The first time, she expanded the repurchase operation to $4 billion, and the market somewhat cooperated, with yields dipping slightly; the second time, she hinted at further increases, but the market outright rejected it. After the round, the 10-year Treasury yield closed at 4.7%, and the 30-year at 5.25%, almost identical to levels before the rescue efforts—essentially a futile exercise. It wasn’t just Treasuries that were left hanging. Last night, all three major U.S. stock indices fell: the Dow dropped 1.32%, the S&P 500 fell 0.87%, and the Nasdaq declined 1%. More striking was Walmart, which beat revenue and earnings expectations but saw its stock plunge over 9% intraday because same-store sales growth in the U.S. hit a six-year low, and its Q3 profit guidance missed expectations. Even a global retail giant can’t move merchandise, signaling a real chill on the consumer side. Why is the market indifferent to the Secretary’s rescue efforts? Breaking it down, there are three reasons. Throwing $4 billion into a Treasury market worth tens of trillions barely makes a sound—more show than substance; the repurchase operation eases liquidity, but the current yield rise is driven by inflation expectations and fiscal deficits, so using a liquidity tool to fix a structural problem is ineffective; worse, the frequent interventions backfire on confidence—the more the Treasury acts, the more the market senses anxiety behind the high deficit, even the steward is uneasy, so how solid can the house be? The most intriguing question is where the money is going. With Treasuries sluggish and the dollar weakening, capital instinctively seeks alternatives. In the past month, gold and Bitcoin have both risen over 10%. These two assets, seen as hedges against fiat currency systems, are strengthening simultaneously, reflecting the same narrative: trust in fiat currency is loosening, and money is voting with its feet. For traders, the value of this trend lies in the transmission chain. Treasury yields and the dollar index directly influence risk appetite in the crypto market. If long-term yields continue to rise, U.S. stocks will come under pressure, and crypto could be dragged down in the short term; conversely, if the macro narrative continues to ferment, the logic of safe-haven funds flowing into BTC will become stronger. The script of short-term bearishness and long-term bullishness is currently unfolding in this direction. Watching long-term bond trends is more useful than focusing on short-term market noise. What will Yellen’s next move be? The market is waiting to see. Do you think the Treasury can come up with tools tougher than repurchase operations?Old Mining Pool Files for Bankruptcy as BTC Hits New High BTC just broke 76,000, and the market is scorching hot. In this atmosphere, a veteran crypto mining pool quietly filed for bankruptcy protection in the U.S. Poolin Technology submitted a Chapter 11 petition to the New Jersey Federal Bankruptcy Court on July 22, with two affiliated entities filing together. The asset sale hearing is scheduled for September 18, and the bidding deadline is September 8. Some may be unfamiliar with the name, but veterans in the mining community remember it well. Poolin was founded in 2017 and consistently ranked among the top three in global hash rate at its peak. The Chinese community called it the "Coin Print" mining pool. Back then, many miners hosted their machines under its umbrella. Now, after just a few years, it has come to bankruptcy—a true case of how things have changed. Where exactly the mining pool’s money went is the most curious part of this bankruptcy. Chapter 11 bankruptcy does not mean immediate liquidation but gives the company a chance to reorganize and sell assets. In the next two months, its equipment, hash rate, and accounts receivable may be put up for sale. Creditors must submit proof of claims before September 8, and the asset sale hearing on September 18 will determine how the assets are sold. Anyone wanting to recover money will have to line up at the table. This serves as a more valuable reminder to ordinary players than just watching the spectacle. Mining pools are capital-intensive businesses, involving hosting hash power, paying electricity bills on behalf of miners, and settling earnings. Every step involves holding other people’s money. Cash flow looks good in a bull market, but once the market weakens or operations falter, the first to be affected are users’ deposited funds. Several names in the mining world have collapsed over the years; Poolin is just the latest. Recovering miners’ funds will be difficult. For those of us trading, this is a wake-up call: don’t keep assets where you don’t control the private keys. The operational risks of custodial platforms get magnified when the market turns sour. Control over on-chain assets is always more valuable than platform promises. This is easy to overlook in a bull market but becomes clear in bankruptcy cases. In the short term, the mining pool’s bankruptcy has limited impact on the market; BTC’s supply and demand logic won’t change because of this. But in the long run, miner liquidation is often seen as a sign of a cycle bottom. The reshuffling of the hash rate market is actually good for network health, and those who survive this round will hold more concentrated shares. Some fall even in a bull market, which itself is a signal worth pondering. Do people around you still use mining pool hosting? Those who have stepped on this kind of landmine probably have a lot to say.Sellers are nearly exhausted, with a historical median rise of 155 points Sellers are almost done selling, which could be one of the most extreme readings ever. Crypto asset management firm 21Shares released a set of data: Bitcoin's seller exhaustion indicator is now about 0.007, placing it in the lowest 0.3% range of all readings since 2010. In other words, 99.7% of the time, sellers have never been this exhausted. How rare is this number? History shows that Bitcoin has only seen similar low readings 11 times. After the previous 10 occurrences, the price one year later was always higher than at the signal, with a median increase of 155%. Simply put, every time sellers have been this depleted, it has generally been followed by a decent rally. First, let's explain what this indicator is: it doesn't look at price but measures the intensity of chip turnover. After a certain depth of decline, fewer people are willing to cut losses, and sell orders become sparse—like water flowing out of a bucket slowing visibly as it empties. The 0.007 reading means that the number of people willing to trade chips at low levels is near a historical extreme low. But don't get ahead of yourself. 21Shares themselves caution upfront: this indicator does not mean Bitcoin has confirmed a bottom. Historically, after the signal appears, prices can still fall further in the short term, wiping out the last batch of panic sellers before completing a trend reversal. In other words, the indicator tells you chips are settling, but it doesn't guarantee the bottom is near. For traders doing swing trades, this data is more of a structural reference than a timing tool. Its value lies in mindset management: even if the market grinds lower for a while, it's more likely the final turnover rather than the start of a new round of selling. So don't panic sell on the last dip. Conversely, if there is a huge volume spike at some point, indicating large-scale exits, that is the signal to be cautious. Looking longer term, this signal aligns with four consecutive days of net inflows into ETFs and institutional holdings reaching new highs, indicating supply-side pressure is indeed easing. But the historical median 155% gain is someone else's history; no one can guarantee it will repeat this cycle. Anyone who treats this number as a sure bet is truly taking a risk. Interestingly, both bulls and bears can use this report as ammunition: bears say there is still one last dip before sellers are exhausted, bulls say that in ten years, ten times this signal appeared and was followed by gains. What do you think? Is seller exhaustion a reliable measure to mark the bottom?80,000 ETH whales are quietly moving back to exchanges BTC just broke above $76,000, and the total crypto market cap surged to $2.6 trillion, with the group chat full of voices saying the bull market is back. But at the peak of this excitement, on-chain monitoring caught an unusual move: a whale who once built a $140 million position in ETH is moving coins back to exchanges bit by bit. This address 0x268…47643 withdrew 79,226 ETH from Binance between July and August, at an average price of $1,776, which alone amounts to $140 million in real money. Starting August 19, it began reverse operations, depositing a total of 10,887 ETH back to trading platforms, worth about $24.16 million. At the current price, selling this amount would realize a floating profit of $4.81 million. Note, it is not panic selling. On-chain data shows this address still holds 47,889 wstETH and 1,200 WBTC, has lent out 83.67 million USDS, with a health factor of 2.26, far from liquidation. It is simply taking some profits at the market’s most euphoric moment while holding the rest of the position. This composure is completely different from those forced to liquidate. For swing traders, this data deserves close attention. Whales moving coins to exchanges doesn’t mean an immediate dump, but at least it shows this price level is worth taking profits. ETH’s current price near $2,360 is about 30% higher than its average entry price, BTC surged to $76,000, and short-term sentiment is indeed hot. The hotter it gets, the more you need to watch profit-taking actions. If this address continues depositing in the next few days or if large on-chain transfers to exchanges increase, be prepared for a short-term pullback after the rally. Looking longer term, it is still leveraging through collateralized loans, indicating no mid-term bearish shift; profit-taking is just position management. Long-term bullish, short-term cautious—smart money often plays this way in bull markets: holding core positions while cashing out some floating profits at highs, then buying back on dips. This round’s context is worth mentioning: BTC rose 16% in two days, first a short squeeze ignited the rally, then ETFs saw four consecutive days of net inflows, with real money buying spot. In this rhythm, a single whale’s profit-taking isn’t bearish but serves as a sentiment thermometer. When smart money starts cashing out, it often signals the market is entering a more cautious phase. What I’m most curious about now is how much of this $140 million position will be reduced in the end? Do you think the whale’s profit-taking signals a top, or is it just changing stance to continue holding?That whale who hoarded 140 million has started to run Bitcoin stands at 75,000, altcoins are all in the green, and the group chat is shouting bull return. Amid this frenzy, one address quietly began moving coins to exchanges. The on-chain data is watching this address, starting with 0x268 and ending with 47643. From late July to early August, it withdrew over 79,000 ETH from Binance, which at the average price at the time of over 1,700 USD per ETH, amounts to about 140 million USD. It used the old leverage loop strategy: first pledging ETH to borrow stablecoins, then using stablecoins to buy more ETH, stacking positions layer by layer, betting on a one-way rise. This method snowballs quickly in a bull market, but once it reverses, the crash is brutal—many people have gone from a hundred million to zero this way. In mid-August, the trend quietly changed. Starting from the 19th, this address gradually deposited over 10,000 ETH back to the platform, equivalent to more than 24 million USD. Based on its entry cost, if this batch were sold on the secondary market, it could pocket over 4.8 million USD. The funds haven't fully moved out yet, but the action is clear: someone is starting to close the net at the top, handing over their holdings while everyone else is most excited. Interestingly, it didn’t liquidate and run. The address still holds nearly 48,000 wstETH and 1,200 WBTC, borrowed over 83 million USDS, and has a health factor of 2.26, far from liquidation. What does this mean? It’s not bearish; it’s locking in some profits first, keeping the base position, ready to attack or defend. True experts never bet their fate on a single market move—they want to cash out, not just see paper gains. This kind of operation is typical in the circle. When the market is hottest, retail investors rush in, institutions announce ETF net inflows, but those holding large positions often choose this moment to hand chips to the latecomers. Yesterday, the Bitcoin spot ETF still saw a net inflow of over 600 million USD, with BlackRock alone taking 500 million. They cheer on stage and collect money, but behind the scenes, someone quietly dumps chips to retail investors. The spectacle on stage and the calculations behind the scenes are never the same. When Bitcoin rises again, they smile watching others take the bag, while their accounts have already earned real money; what’s on-chain is just numbers. I checked recent on-chain records; this isn’t the only address quietly taking profits. Some sold over 9,000 BTC within a month, others held 120,000 ETH for half a year before finally breaking even. Everyone talks about the eve of a bull market, but those voting with real money already have their fingers on the sell button. We always focus on which price integer level was broken, but rarely ask: who is the one taking the bag now? In this round of frenzy, do you think you are the one cashing out early, or the one catching chips above 75,000?Whales quietly moved coins off the market while HYPE surged In the past 24 hours, a trading company called FalconX did something that made people uneasy. It moved about 1.42 million HYPE tokens in batches into major exchanges. At the current price of around $73 per token, the total value exceeds $104 million. These transfers were not small-scale; the tokens were distributed across Gate, Bybit, OKX, Coinbase, and KuCoin. Gate alone received over 480,000 tokens, worth approximately $34.14 million; Bybit and OKX each received more than 320,000 tokens; Coinbase got 250,000 tokens; even KuCoin received 25,000 tokens. Together, these five major exchanges almost dumped this massive amount of chips onto the public market in one go. The interesting part is this: HYPE is the platform token of the decentralized perpetual contract platform Hyperliquid. Not long ago, Trump personally mentioned it, saying he wanted to promote its compliant launch in the U.S. After that statement, the token price surged more than 20% in a few days. Odaily's data is even more direct, showing a single-day increase of 26.86%, pushing the price above $70, just shy of its all-time high. The community is buzzing with excitement, discussing the moment of acceptance and the "American favorite" status, with many feeling this rally has only just begun. Yet, at this hottest moment, powerful players are moving funds into exchanges. Onchain Lens monitoring shows that the off-exchange buyers who took the tokens are still continuously selling, and not dumping all at once but selling in a series. FalconX handles institutional OTC and matching business; when it transfers tokens in, it is very likely that those who acquired tokens early at low prices are taking advantage of the market sentiment to offload their holdings. It should be noted that a large portion of HYPE tokens were distributed to early users and the team at extremely low cost or even via airdrops. For them, selling at the current price means real profit, almost unrelated to cost. This picture is even more intriguing: on one side, the hype and sentiment are ignited; on the other, chips are quietly moving from institutions to the public market. This kind of scenario has played out many times in history. When retail investors think this time is different, those with truly low-cost positions are quietly calculating how much they can pocket. Moving tokens into exchanges does not necessarily mean an immediate dump; it could be custody or portfolio adjustment. But with over $100 million worth of volume on the table, it at least shows someone is not planning to just wait it out. Do you think this wave of HYPE's heat is truly supported by fundamentals, or is it just another emotion-driven relay?The US Treasury bond market has been like a roller coaster these past two days, but there's actually a deep logic behind it. Yesterday, the US Treasury doubled the scale of long-term bond repurchases to rescue the market. As soon as the news broke, the 30-year US Treasury yield immediately plunged, and the stock market and Bitcoin also celebrated wildly. And guess what? Today, bonds were sold off crazily again, rates soared once more, and the US stock market fell back. What does this mean? It means that what everyone fears now is not simply "lack of money (liquidity shortage)," but the massive US debt that has already exceeded $40 trillion! Deficits, inflation, and endless bond issuance— the Treasury's reliance on repurchases to suppress rates is just a desperate measure, unable to solve the core problem of "how to actually repay this huge debt." In the short term, persistently high long-term rates are indeed bearish for stocks and Bitcoin. But if you look further ahead, this is actually the biggest bullish logic for Bitcoin: US government debt keeps growing ➡️ To repay debt, they must desperately suppress interest rates ➡️ Forced to start various forms of financial easing. When the traditional fiat system is held hostage by debt, the value of Bitcoin as a "decentralized asset" will be infinitely amplified! So, from now on, let's not just focus on the price of Bitcoin $BTC. The real key indicator that will determine how far this bull market can go is "how aggressively the US government will intervene to protect the Treasury bond market." That is the most critical trump card! #BTC加速拉升，资金还能继续接力吗？ #美财政部扩大长债回购，30年美债高位回落 This round of the crypto market rally is essentially an extreme structural trend dominated by top core assets. Almost all incremental off-exchange funds are concentrated in established leaders like BTC and ETH, which have full consensus, as well as popular new coins with fresh explosive narratives. The vast majority of marginal coins without new stories or funding support receive not even a fraction of the liquidity dividend. The market indices have been rising steadily, with HYPE and LIT consecutively surging several times. Many retail investors are misled by the illusion of a broad rally and rush into unpopular small coins, fearing missing out on the trend. $KAITO just launched on the Aura platform and, according to past patterns, should have experienced a wave of positive price movement. However, the actual market is so quiet that active buy orders are almost nonexistent, and even basic buy support is completely missing. It has not caught any of the upward momentum of this market rally. #财报观察员：泡泡玛特增长换挡，多IP能否接力？ As Bitcoin just broke $75,000, an altcoin doubled first When the afternoon market software popped up, I stared at that row of gains twice. Bitcoin had just stood above $75,000, and the whole market was still saying this wave was institutions leading Bitcoin, but the ones really running wild were the altcoins. ONG rose more than double in the past 24 hours, with its price jumping from less than $0.13 straight into the doubling zone, a gain of over 109%. Following closely were NEIRO up nearly 60%, COLLECT up 45%, ENA up nearly 40%, and PEOPLE, BOME, SPK all up around 30%. Those names that usually don’t get much mention suddenly all popped up today. What’s interesting is the rhythm. In the past two weeks, everyone was focused on whether Bitcoin could hold $75,000 and whether ETFs were still seeing continuous net inflows, as if altcoins were forgotten. Just past midnight today, Bitcoin and Ethereum spot ETFs combined net inflows exceeded $800 million, institutional funds didn’t withdraw, which gave altcoins the confidence to rise along. But once funds confirmed Bitcoin wouldn’t fall for now, the first to ignite were those small coins with the biggest volatility and easiest to overlook. The total crypto market cap touched $2.6 trillion today, up nearly 6% in one day, while Bitcoin’s market share still hovered at 58%, indicating altcoins captured a significant share of this increase. I checked on-chain data; the leaders in this rally are almost all the meme and old public chain tokens that had fallen the hardest before. They were hit hardest during Bitcoin’s early August correction and are now rebounding fiercely, a typical oversold rebound. The problem is these tokens’ rises rely on sentiment and capital rotation, and once Bitcoin chooses a new direction, they’ll fall faster than anyone else. A few veteran traders around me sounded hesitant. Some think this is the real start of altcoin season, the old script of Bitcoin rising first then altcoins following; others worry this is just capital overflow during Bitcoin’s sideways movement, and the faster the rise, the harder the fall might be later. For ONG, which doubled in a day, no one can say how much of the volume is real demand and how much is short-term capital trying to catch attention. If you happen to be holding some altcoins that have been dormant for a long time, you probably feel relieved today. But on the flip side, when people in the group start showing screenshots of altcoins doubling, that’s often when sentiment is hottest and the most likely time to get dumped. Whether this wave is the start of altcoin season or just fireworks while Bitcoin takes a breather, we’ll keep watching.BTC’s 7.92% advance looks more like a positioning reset than a broad risk-on confirmation. ETH and SOL are participating, but their smaller gains suggest capital is still concentrating in the most liquid asset rather than moving decisively down the curve. The FOMC split matters because it keeps the policy path less predictable. I would treat this rally as credible but not yet self-sustaining, with follow-through across major alts needed before calling it a broader regime shift. Just my read, not advice.Ripple pushes stablecoins into corporate credit business In the past, when we talked about Ripple, the first things that came to mind were the old phrases: cross-border payments, banking channels, XRP for settlement. But in the past couple of days, what it has done shows a clear shift in approach. On August 21, Ripple disclosed that it is supporting a new institutional credit fund. This fund involves the lending platform Clearpool and credit management firm Cicada Partners, planning to use Ripple's own stablecoin RLUSD on the XRP Ledger to directly provide working capital loans to fintech and payment companies. Simply put, Ripple used to treat XRP as a payment channel, but now it wants to turn RLUSD into revolving cash in the hands of enterprises. Borrowers receive RLUSD and repay in RLUSD, with the entire lending chain operating on Ripple's own blockchain. The division of labor is quite subtle. Cicada is responsible for finding borrowers, setting loan terms, and managing credit risk; Clearpool builds the technical framework for the lending pool; Ripple itself invests as a limited partner under the same terms as others, without underwriting bad debts. It does not act as the lender but controls issuing the coin, putting it on-chain, and driving traffic. This product has not yet launched on the XRP Ledger mainnet, and Ripple has not disclosed the exact investment amount. But the direction is clear: first, get RLUSD flowing between real enterprises, shifting the stablecoin use case from speculation and transfers to interest generation and credit. Behind this is actually a new strategy in the stablecoin war. In recent years, the competition was about who got listed on more exchanges and who had larger circulation. Now, leading players realize that just holding coins is not enough; the coin must be borrowed and lent on enterprise accounts to generate interest to truly lock in liquidity. Ripple’s move targets this credit creation position. RLUSD is a compliant stablecoin Ripple launched only at the end of 2024, starting much later than USDC and USDT. Now it bypasses pure circulation competition and directly targets the more lucrative enterprise credit market, carving out a differentiated path. The question remains whether enterprises are willing to borrow RLUSD, whether the interest rates are attractive, and whether on-chain lending can withstand bad debt risks. Ripple has laid the pipeline, but whether the funds flow through or detour depends on market acceptance. What do you think? Is this left-hand issuing coins and right-hand lending approach truly able to activate RLUSD, or is it just another case of much noise but little action?The US stock contracts have collectively cooled off—where did the money from Bitcoin's rebound go? Bitcoin has surged from 57,000 all the way back to 75,000, and the group chat is full of joy, as if the bear market never happened. But there's a counterintuitive data point: while crypto is broadly rebounding, the so-called US stock contracts that people usually trade on platforms like Binance, OKX, and Bitget have all seen their trading volumes drop, not rising with the market. RootData just released a list showing the top five platforms, and the picture is a bit awkward. Binance's 24-hour stock derivatives trading volume is about $21 billion, down 31% from the previous period; Hyperliquid is about $3.68 billion, also down 31%; Gate is even worse, dropping 43%; OKX fell 41%, and Bitget shrank 27%. All five major exchanges are green across the board, with no exceptions. Normally, when the market heats up, speculation should increase, but at the same time, the open interest in native crypto contracts is quietly piling up. According to Coinglass data, Bitcoin contract open interest is about 735,000 contracts, equivalent to $55 billion, up 5.65% in one day; Ethereum contracts also increased by 5.17%. The money hasn't left the table; it just moved from the US stock trading table to the Bitcoin trading table. Behind this is actually the same group of people shifting positions. Since last year, Binance and Bitget have successively brought tokenized stocks like Tesla and Nvidia onto their contract platforms, hoping to retain retail investors who trade both crypto and US stocks. During a deep market drop, everyone moved their US stock positions in to hedge risks. Now with Bitcoin rebounding, US stock contracts have become a forgotten corner that no one wants to touch. Interestingly, this is exactly the opposite of the recent narrative that crypto exchanges have become US stock night sessions. Back then, traditional assets were desperately trying to squeeze onto the blockchain; now, on-chain funds are having fun on their own and are too lazy to look up at US stocks. Liquidity is the most honest thing—wherever there is volatility and a story, it flows there, and no one can stop it. What’s more worth pondering is that these platforms initially pushed hard on stock derivatives to capture the traffic and stories from US stocks. Now that the traffic has returned to crypto itself, the platforms they built are cooling off, essentially making a wedding dress for others. For us, it’s also a reminder that the focus of so-called all-asset trading platforms has always followed the money. So don’t think that the cooling of US stock contracts means everyone has left the market. People are still here; they’ve just moved their bets elsewhere. The real suspense to watch next is whether, when Bitcoin stabilizes and US stocks throw out a big move again, this batch of money will rush back or not.The top Bitcoin treasury has just broken even, while the Ethereum treasury is still down by $5.8 billion The software company that even changed its name to a Bitcoin ticker finally caught a breather at the $68,000 price level. Data shows that as of August 16, Strategy holds over 840,000 bitcoins with an average purchase price of $75,385, while the market price was just above $75,428 at that time. Just a few dollars difference, and it has climbed out of the deep hole on paper for the first time. The person who vowed to turn the company into Bitcoin itself finally wasn’t choked by their own words this time. But in the same week, another treasury company heavily invested in Ethereum is still underwater. BitMine holds over 5.8 million ETH at a cost basis of $3,366. Even though Ethereum recently surged to $2,362, it still shows a floating loss of over $5.8 billion on the books. One is just emerging, the other still sunk dozens of meters deep. This stark contrast is eye-catching and enough to make those following the trend of buying treasury stocks nervous. Interestingly, the scripts for these two were originally reversed. Last year, Bitcoin crashed from a high of $126,000 down to $57,000, and Strategy’s position once lost so much that people wondered if the boss had lost his mind, considering it was the publicly listed company holding the most Bitcoin in the market. Unexpectedly, a few months later, it was BitMine, betting on Ethereum, that got grilled first. It entered when Ethereum was at a high, with the highest cost basis of all. Ethereum’s rebound has been strong, but it’s still far from its cost line, making it far from easy to break even. More troublesome is that treasury companies face monthly financial reports and shareholder scrutiny. If ETH doesn’t return to $3,300 soon, BitMine’s pressure will only increase. We often say institutional involvement is an anchor, but when the top treasury is still hovering around the cost line and the second largest treasury’s losses could cover half a listed company, who can still say this wave is an ironclad bull market? Bitcoin has reached key moving averages, and ETH is retracing, but the treasuries’ recovery progress is wildly uneven, showing that this round of money hasn’t flowed evenly into every corner—some are recovering, others are still bleeding. What’s more worth pondering is that these two are just a microcosm of the treasury company army. Over the past year, more and more companies have swapped their balance sheets for crypto. The money they brought from the stock market ultimately became buy orders on exchanges and an indirect entry point for retail holders. But if the treasuries themselves are still deeply underwater, retail investors buying treasury stocks are essentially standing guard for others’ unrealized losses. Everyone is comrades when prices rise, but the real test hasn’t come yet. Next, it depends on two things. Will Strategy continue to add positions after breaking even, or will it take profits and cash out, since it knows best how to maneuver near the cost line? And how long will BitMine have to endure to fill that $5.8 billion hole at the current rebound pace? What do you think—will those who break even first laugh last, or are they just lucky?Bitcoin surges to 75,000 but Americans have been selling for ninety-five consecutive days This is quite counterintuitive. Bitcoin has bounced from just over 60,000 all the way up to around 75,000, and more voices in social circles are calling it a bull run, yet a set of data quietly tells the opposite story. Coinbase's Bitcoin premium index has been in negative territory for 95 consecutive days, meaning that the price quoted for the same coin in the U.S. has long been lower than Binance's. This negative premium has recently narrowed to -0.0221%, looking close to zero, but it hasn't broken this streak since May 19. Before this, the longest continuous negative premium record was 40 days earlier this year, and before that, about 30 days during last year's flash crash. This time it has more than doubled, setting a new historical record. In other words, while Bitcoin has rebounded several thousand points from the bottom, Americans have almost been selling at a discount throughout. What’s even more intriguing is the timing. During these ninety-five days, Bitcoin didn’t just fall unilaterally; it first consolidated at the bottom and then violently rebounded, squeezing billions of dollars worth of shorts just in the past two days. The price was clearly rising, yet Coinbase continued to show a persistent negative premium. Such divergence is rarely seen in previous bull markets. On-chain data also shows that between 61,800 and 63,100, over two million Bitcoins changed hands, forming a strong support zone, while resistance above is relatively light. Some might say that a negative premium only indicates heavy selling pressure on Coinbase and cannot be directly equated with institutional capital fleeing. That’s true, but it becomes interesting in the current context. On one side, traditional giants like BlackRock and Franklin are quietly positioning in tokenized assets; on the other, retail investors concentrated on Coinbase are continuously selling at a discount. These two groups seem to be giving completely different answers to the same question. Even the whale who shouted about opening 10x short positions has increased their short exposure to $143 million during this rebound and is currently at a floating loss. There’s another detail many have overlooked. Coinbase’s negative premium is often regarded as a thermometer of U.S. institutional sentiment because it mainly involves compliant funds. Now this thermometer has stayed cool, never turning positive even as Bitcoin hit new highs in this rebound. This suggests that those truly bottom-fishing might be more from offshore markets and the newly entered traditional asset managers, rather than domestic U.S. retail investors. This is completely the opposite of the scene half a year ago when U.S. retail investors led the charge. So the question arises: Is this rebound a genuine consensus backed by real money, or are some people just enjoying the hype while others quietly exit? Is your position aligned with the buying force, or have you quietly become the object of someone else’s selling?CFTC Chairman Lays Down the Law Even If the Bill Fails CFTC Chairman Selig made his position clear this time. At the inaugural meeting of the Innovation Advisory Committee, he presented a new roadmap for the financial frontier: the preferred regulatory approach for crypto is the CLARITY Act, but if Congress continues to delay, the CFTC will use its existing authority to set rules on its own. In other words, whether legislation passes or not, he intends to regulate the crypto market structure himself. He also identified three new battlegrounds: crypto assets, prediction markets, and the computing power market. He said computing power is the most important commodity of this era, and public consultation on AI computing power futures has already begun. This aligns with his recent statement that even if the CLARITY Act fails, the crypto industry will still have rules. The message is straightforward: don’t expect the regulatory vacuum to last long. It will either be clear rules from Congress or implicit rules set by the CFTC—one of the two. In terms of concrete actions, the CFTC is evaluating a new type of regulated platform called the crypto asset market, which essentially opens a compliance channel within the existing framework for legitimate trading. This is a complete reversal from the approach of issuing subpoenas and enforcement actions in previous years. Regulation is finally shifting from pushing people away to building a stage. For us, the signal is twofold. On the positive side, regulation is moving from uncertain enforcement to an executable compliance entry point, giving institutional capital more confidence to enter. On the downside, how the rules are written and how strict they are is controlled by regulators, not the market. The prediction market line is also worth watching. The CFTC has put event contract rulemaking on the agenda, and with NYSE parent company ICE discussing increasing its stake in Polymarket, compliance in this area may come faster than expected. Once computing power futures are launched, the boundary between AI and crypto will blur further, and capital will flow back and forth between the two markets. For contract traders, regulation linking crypto, AI, and computing power will make market correlations more complex; just relying on crypto market logic won’t be enough. Ultimately, the underlying tone of this market cycle is regulatory easing combined with improved liquidity expectations. Selig’s remarks are like a reassurance pill for the market but also a reminder that the reins are always in the regulators’ hands. Well-written rules can sustain a bull market; poorly written rules can turn positive momentum into negative in an instant. Do you think the CFTC’s proactive move is a reassurance for the market or another sword hanging overhead?People shouting about the super cycle are selling their stocks themselves A few days ago, Robinhood's CEO said on camera that we are at the beginning of a super cycle, and the golden age of crypto has just begun. No sooner had he spoken than insiders started selling stocks. SEC filings clearly show that Robinhood's CFO Verma Shiv sold 3,982 shares at an average price of $95.07 on August 17, cashing out about $378,600, reducing his holdings to 51,963 shares. Director Bhatt Baiju acted earlier, selling 50,317 shares at $96.8 on August 14, taking away about $4.87 million. Together, they reduced holdings by over $5.25 million in three days. This is interesting. The company externally talks about a crypto bull market, retail investor return, and a super cycle, while internal executives quietly cash out. Selling shares doesn’t necessarily mean bearishness; it’s normal for executives to sell some stock at their own pace, but the timing is so coincidental and right after the CEO’s bullish statements that it inevitably raises questions. Robinhood has been one of the most direct entry points for crypto retail investors in recent years. The CEO’s bullish remarks alone can stir up FOMO in groups. But when real money moves contradict the bullish talk, experienced players have seen this kind of contrast many times. Looking back, the pattern of talking bullish while reducing holdings was common in the last cycle too. Project founders would tweet about holding long-term while quietly transferring unlocked tokens to exchanges, ultimately trapping trusting retail investors. Narratives can be fabricated, but on-chain data and filings don’t lie. What’s more intriguing is the amount itself. $5.25 million isn’t a huge sum for a company worth tens of billions, but the real signal is not how much was sold, but the timing—right when the bull market narrative is loudest. Insiders voting with their feet is often more honest than their words. For ordinary players like us, the value of this is not to judge whether Robinhood is good or bad, but to establish our own discipline. When big players shout about a cycle, first check if they have been selling recently before deciding to follow. If you engrave this in your mind, you can avoid many pitfalls. I’m not advising you to run with them. Just a reminder: when you hear big players shouting about a cycle, take a quick look at what their accounts are doing. The most dangerous thing in a bull market is taking others’ marketing talk as your own trading basis. Would you rather trust their words or their sell orders? Next time you see a CEO flaunting a bull market, remember to check if they sold last month. Don’t just listen to stories; look at the books. The books are much more honest than speeches.2.7 billion short positions liquidated, but institutions say this rally is too early My account finally turned green this week. BTC broke through $75,000, hitting a three-month high, and the group chat was full of celebrations. But watching Coinglass data, I felt a bit uneasy. On Wednesday's surge alone, over $2.75 billion worth of BTC shorts were liquidated. In the past 24 hours, another $783 million in positions were liquidated, of which $748 million were shorts. In other words, this rally was largely driven by short-sellers being cornered and forced to close their positions, not by new money buying in with real capital. Analyst Shawn Young poured cold water on this. He said the market is overestimating the impact of the US Treasury's small-scale repo operations; the bond market changes mainly forced shorts to cover, not improved BTC's fundamentals. US Treasuries are still competing with Bitcoin for marginal funds, so calling a breakthrough of $70,000 premature. On-chain data actually provides ammunition for both bulls and bears. Analyst Ali Charts pointed out that BTC has formed a new strong support between $61,849 and $63,111, where over 2 million BTC changed hands. Looking up, $83,300 to $84,569 is another dense trading zone, with about 1 million BTC waiting to break even. There is a floor below and a wall above. Dominick John from Zeus Research agrees with this view. Short-term short liquidations can push prices further, but once the forced buying power is exhausted, the price will depend on real spot buying, liquidity conditions, and macro fundamentals. Whether ETF funds continue to flow in net is the real indicator to watch now. The market position is actually very delicate. The $70,000 to $72,000 range has become a new zone for confirming direction; holding above it could see $75,000. But if BTC falls back below $68,000 to $69,000 and ETH loses $2,200, beware that this rally was mainly amplified by short liquidations. The bigger constraint is the Fed; several members in the July minutes believe inflation still needs to rise, and the tightening door is not closed. This rebound is awkward. Everyone wants to confirm if the bull market is back, but the driver of the rise is short covering, not incremental funds. Once the liquidation fuel runs out, the market will immediately expose a question: how much new money is willing to buy above $70,000? I think ordinary players should seriously consider one thing: whether the gains in your account this week are from correctly predicting the direction or simply being pushed up by short squeezes. Whether new money comes in or not will determine how far this rally can go. Did you recover this week, or were you left behind?A mysterious address quietly accumulating millions of dollars in Bitcoin long positions In the early morning on-chain monitoring, an address starting with 0xa0 caught attention. In the past few weeks, it neither chased the rally nor issued calls, but slowly accumulated Bitcoin long positions one by one. From the order records, this address built positions at prices ranging from $53,653 to $66,667, with several large orders of 132 BTC each appearing in between. After the upward trend around August 20 was confirmed, it quietly amassed a perpetual long position worth about $9.9 million, with an average entry price of $68,785, currently floating a profit of about $760,000. Interestingly, it barely touched ETH, SOL, or other popular altcoins, putting all its funds on Bitcoin. This level of concentration doesn’t look like casual retail trading but more like a premeditated trade based on a macro liquidity improvement judgment. There are earlier clues as well. This address tried to position in the XYZ100 index in early August, repeatedly adjusting its holdings, as if testing the rhythm with small positions. Only when the market really started moving did it fully load up on Bitcoin positions. Such patience is rare in today’s noisy market. At the same time, US regulatory expectations are also loosening. The Treasury doubled the scale of long-term bond repurchases, the SEC introduced new crypto regulatory proposals, and policy signals have been coming one after another, all aligning with its narrative. However, the problem is that changes in the bond market mostly force short sellers to cover rather than genuinely improving Bitcoin’s fundamentals. This also explains why it is completely different from the recent flashy whales. Some show their orders and shout targets, some jump back and forth between longs and shorts, but this address has been silent from start to finish, never appearing on social platforms. On-chain, these silent accumulation addresses are always more worth watching than loud influencers shouting calls every day. They don’t talk or show orders; they just arrange their chips at their own pace, waiting for the market to come to them. By the time most of us react, the price is often no longer where it was. What really matters is the contrast. Just these past two days, another famous whale kept opening shorts repeatedly, getting shaken out back and forth, losing on both long and short sides. Meanwhile, this silent address only took one direction from start to finish, and just happened to bet right before the turning point. This level of early positioning—are they betting on a macro recovery or simply riding the tailwind of this short squeeze? Bitcoin’s surge from $64,000 to over $72,000 was largely driven by a short squeeze. How much real cash spot buying there is, no one can say for sure now. When we see such a “god-level” address, our first reaction is often to follow, but their cost basis is between $50,000 and $60,000. If we only rush in after $70,000, our role might be completely different. Is this rebound really what you and I expected before?A chain that claims to be decentralized but freezes itself A message exploded in the community early this morning. MANTRA Chain officially announced that an incident affecting on-chain operations occurred, and the team proactively paused the entire chain as a precaution. All interfaces and transactions are completely frozen; users cannot deposit or withdraw funds temporarily. In short, a public chain that focuses on RWA, constantly talks about asset tokenization and compliance narratives, pressed the pause button itself. This scene is surreal enough. Usually, projects like this love to talk about decentralization, but when trouble comes, the decision power still rests in the hands of a few team members. What’s most unsettling is the statement that the root cause is still unconfirmed. The team neither clarified what exactly happened nor provided a recovery timeline. Everything on the chain is frozen now; users don’t know how long they have to wait or the status of their assets. One announcement, and the entire network is at a standstill. It’s not unusual for project teams to proactively pause the chain; Solana was repeatedly criticized in its early days for frequent outages. But every pause exposes the same issue: users think holding private keys means security, but once the chain stops processing transactions, the so-called assets are just numbers on a ledger—if they can’t move, they can’t move. This kind of event is the best test of a project’s quality. People often talk about self-custody and on-chain transparency, but when trouble hits, whether the chain stops or when it resumes is entirely up to the project team. Whether you see it as responsible prevention or a sign that on-chain governance is fragile, everyone has their own judgment. What’s more subtle is the timing. The market just went through an epic short squeeze, with Bitcoin surging to 75,000, and overall market sentiment recovering. Suddenly, a chain halts at such a moment—it’s hard not to speculate. Is there an undisclosed technical or security issue, or is something being suppressed in advance? For a project that constantly emphasizes institutional-grade and compliance narratives, this handling only amplifies external doubts. The chain can stop, but once trust stops, it’s not so easy to restart. What ordinary people can do is actually very limited. If you have money in such projects, the most important thing now is not the price but when the official second report will come and what the root cause really is. The chain can be restored, but trust may not. What do you think about a chain freezing itself—is it prudent or a danger signal? This round of Bitcoin's violent rebound: not a single positive factor, but the result of the resonance of three forces In the past 24 hours, the crypto market has experienced the strongest recovery rally this year. Bitcoin quickly broke through the $70,000 mark from the $64,000 range, and Ethereum surged nearly 19% in one day, approaching $2,300. Behind this extreme rally, the market paid a very high leverage price: over 180,000 liquidations occurred within 24 hours, with a total network liquidation scale reaching $3.2 billion. Many attribute this surge to a single piece of news, but the real core is the simultaneous resonance of three factors: macro liquidity recovery + policy expectation reversal + market structure short squeeze, completing a very strong trend repair. 1. Macro foundation: US Treasury supports long-term rates, global risk asset valuations are repriced The underlying logic that triggered this rally first came from a major move by the US Treasury. On August 19, the US Treasury announced an expansion of long-term bond repurchase operations, doubling the single repurchase limit for 10–30 year Treasury bonds from $2 billion to $4 billion, officially implemented on September 9, specifically easing the liquidity shortage and runaway yield rise of long-term bonds. Before this, the 30-year US Treasury yield had surged to a high of 5.337%, continuously suppressing global high-valuation risk assets. After the policy was implemented, long-term yields quickly fell back to around 5.19%, directly breaking the pricing shackles of "high interest rates suppressing risk assets." A decline in risk-free rates means a systemic increase in risk appetite. Gold surged $125 in one day, and crypto assets, which are most sensitive to liquidity and interest rates, were the first to complete valuation repair, with Bitcoin rapidly breaking through from $64,000 to $70,000. This time the market understood the key signal: the US Treasury actively supports long-term bonds, long-term rates have shown a hidden peak, and macro liquidity expectations are officially marginally easing. 2. Policy sentiment: US regulatory attitude turning point, industry certainty significantly returning If macro is the foundation, then the top-level US policy attitude is the fuse igniting the rally. Trump held a focused meeting at the White House with executives from leading crypto companies including Coinbase, Kraken, Ripple, Chainlink, clearly urging Congress to accelerate the passage of the CLARITY Act. This is the most important emotional turning point of this rally: the core anxiety of the market over the past year was never about lack of money, but regulatory uncertainty. Once the bill is passed, it will completely clarify the compliance boundaries of digital assets and end the industry's long-term ambiguous game. At the same time, institutional expectations continue to heat up. Standard Chartered directly updated its view: Treasury support for long bonds and regulatory friendliness are the core positive narratives for Bitcoin, maintaining a year-end target forecast of $100,000. The shift in top-level attitude has completely reversed the market's pessimistic pricing. 3. Trading structure: six months of short accumulation triggers extreme short squeeze Macro + policy provided the reasons for the rise, but the short-term unexpected surge was entirely driven by position structure. Over the past six months, Bitcoin has been oscillating narrowly around the $60,000 range, with a consensus bearish sentiment accumulating and a massive amount of short leverage positions settled in the futures market. When the price broke through a key resistance level, it triggered a programmed chain of liquidations: price rise → short stop-loss liquidation → passive buying influx → further price push, forming a positive feedback short squeeze spiral. The data is most intuitive: $1.44 billion in short liquidations completed within one hour, quickly clearing the weak short positions accumulated over six months. This is also the core reason why this rally's speed and strength far exceed ordinary positive rallies. Complete rally transmission chain review Treasury supports long bonds → long-term rates quickly decline → global liquidity expectations improve → risk asset valuations repair → crypto spot buying warms + derivatives shorts concentrated liquidation → breakout main rally Key points to watch going forward This rally was initially driven by leverage short squeeze, belonging to an emotional and position repair rally. Whether the rally can upgrade from a "short-term rebound" to a "trend reversal" depends on two core validation indicators: 1. Whether Bitcoin spot ETFs can form sustained net inflows to replace short-term leveraged funds; 2. Whether US Treasury yields can maintain a downward trend and macro easing expectations remain stable. Only with spot funds taking over and a stable macro environment can this breakout truly hold and become the starting point of a new trend rally. ⚠️ Market review only, does not constitute any investment advice $BTC $ETH #BTC加速拉升，资金还能继续接力吗？ #Anthropic拟8月底公开IPO文件，募资或追平SpaceX #财报观察员：泡泡玛特增长换挡，多IP能否接力？ Regulatory deadline locked on September 15, Coinbase boss speaks out Brian Armstrong, the boss of Coinbase, dropped a line on X last night, giving the market a concrete timeline for the long-suspended uncertainty. He said that regardless of the path taken, clarity on U.S. crypto regulation seems imminent, and it could come as early as mid-September. He didn’t give a vague expectation but two quite specific scenarios. The first path is that the U.S. Senate secures over sixty votes on September 15 to actually pass the relevant bill. The second path is that the CFTC and SEC jointly issue a new set of rules on September 16, directly clarifying the regulatory framework. Two consecutive days, clearly aiming to cut uncertainty within this window. This sense of urgency is somewhat unusual. In recent years, U.S. crypto legislation has been stuck in back-and-forth struggles between the two chambers of Congress. What practitioners fear most has never been strict rules, but simply not knowing what the rules will look like. Armstrong daringly states a clear date this time, indirectly indicating that insiders in the industry have likely received some internal signals; otherwise, no one would dare to endorse a specific regulatory date. What everyone is really waiting for is how the long-delayed market structure bill will draw the line—specifically, which tokens fall under SEC or CFTC jurisdiction. Until that line is defined, exchanges listing tokens, custody, and staking all feel like walking a tightrope. Coinbase has been one of the most active lobbyists behind the scenes in recent years, investing significant political capital. Now making the timeline explicit seems more like pushing forward the chips they’ve already put on the table. But betting on September also has its costs. For the Senate to gather sixty votes means they must cross party lines and secure enough members, and any procedural hurdle could delay the timeline. And for the two regulatory agencies to jointly issue rules sounds fast, but before actual implementation, the market will still speculate repeatedly on the wording. Historically, such promises have been delayed more than once. What’s even more intriguing is the timing. Bitcoin just surged past 72,000, and the whole market is looking for reasons to keep rising. Regulatory clarity is naturally one of the strongest narratives. Armstrong choosing this moment to speak out is hard to say is just a coincidence. For those of us holding positions, the key takeaway from this news isn’t that regulation will come, but what if it doesn’t. As long as one of the two September checkpoints fails, the suspended certainty will turn into even greater uncertainty. Now you have to ask yourself: is regulation the main support or the sword hanging overhead that hasn’t fallen yet? The Treasury is pumping money to suppress long-term bonds, but Goldman Sachs says the direction can't be changed This week, the Treasury made a big move by at least doubling the scale of long-term U.S. Treasury repurchases, raising the single-round cap from $2 billion to $4 billion and above, effective September 9. The meaning is straightforward: to step in and support long-term interest rates, preventing them from soaring further, so that the debt snowball doesn't crush the market, while also giving the bond market some reassurance. Once the news broke, the dollar weakened, and Bitcoin followed suit, climbing up accordingly. The logic chain is clear: when U.S. Treasury yields go down, money flows into risk assets like BTC, which are scarce assets not dependent on government debt expansion. But Goldman Sachs poured cold water on this. They said this round of operations is similar to precedents in 1961 and 2011, when historically yields were only suppressed by 10 to 20 basis points. This time, relying on repurchases plus adjusting issuance terms, it might be possible to suppress yields by 20 to 40 basis points temporarily. However, the root cause of rising long-term rates remains untouched: the fiscal deficit is still expanding, inflation remains uncertain and recurring, plus AI building data centers and reindustrialization are voraciously consuming capital. The real interest rate baseline is moving upward, so where purchasing power flows is quite clear. This is quite contradictory. In the short term, it's positive for us; yields dropping eases sentiment, and assets like Bitcoin benefit most from liquidity expectations, so they've rallied enthusiastically these days, squeezing shorts hard. But Goldman Sachs warns that while yields can be suppressed temporarily, they can't be suppressed forever. The trend of more expensive capital is irreversible. The Treasury's repurchases only postpone the problem. If inflation rises again, long-term rates will have to go up, and risk assets will need to be repriced. In terms of strategy, don't treat this as the starting gun for a one-sided bull market. In the short term, you can ride the liquidity easing, but don't load your positions too heavily. If the dollar strengthens again or the Fed turns hawkish, a pullback will come quickly, and high leverage will be dangerous. In the long run, the story of scarce assets remains, but the path must be taken step by step. Don't get carried away by a single day's gains, and don't throw in money beyond your disposable funds due to emotional hype—that kind of operation is most likely to be cleared out by a rebound. Looking at the bigger picture, U.S. Treasury yields are the master switch for pricing all risk assets right now. When yields ease, crypto gets a bit of life; when yields rise, even the strongest narratives have to bow. So scanning U.S. Treasury and dollar index data before market open every day is much more practical than staring at group chat trade calls—it helps avoid emotional traps and save on tuition fees. So, do you think this round of U.S. Treasury repurchases can really support the market, or is it just buying a buffer for the decline? Strategy has recovered its losses while peers remain deeply stuck with $5.8 billion in losses Two coin-hoarding companies: one just resurfaced, the other still in deep water. The ledgers laid out show a stark contrast. Data shows that as of August 16, Strategy holds 840,447 BTC at an average cost of $75,385. With BTC's current price surpassing $75,428, this company has finally broken even, effectively turning around after nearly a year of struggle, having suffered losses just as severe as retail investors in the previous downturn. On the other hand, BitMine holds 5.815 million ETH at a cost of $3,366, but the current price is only $2,362. Although the unrealized loss has narrowed compared to before, it remains stuck in a deep hole of $5.836 billion, still far from the surface. Both followed a strategy of buying the dip, but the outcomes differ greatly. Simply put, it’s about the timing of entry and the asset’s volatility. Strategy is heavily weighted in BTC, which led the recent rebound and recovered first, with a clean portfolio structure; BitMine is weighted in ETH, which has also risen but is still far below its cost basis. To break even, ETH needs a much stronger rally, requiring a significant relative gain over BTC to have a chance. For us, these two cases serve as a live textbook. Institutions don’t just buy and win effortlessly. BitMine’s huge losses show that long-term holding still involves enduring drawdowns. A $5.8 billion hole can’t be filled by just chanting long-termism; real unrealized losses don’t lie. Don’t assume coin hoarding is a no-brainer profit just because Strategy broke even. It also took a long beating before recovering, repeatedly testing the break-even line—it’s not inherently stable. In the short term, Strategy breaking even means some holders might take profits, causing minor selling pressure, but after selling, they’ll be lighter and more agile. Institutional overall recovery will improve market risk appetite, potentially boosting ETH’s catch-up rally since both share the coin-hoarding narrative and capital tends to spill over from profitable effects. The long-term logic remains unchanged: BTC’s scarcity story still stands, but timing must be managed carefully. Don’t get thrown off by institutional moves—chasing highs after others break even is counterproductive. As for BitMine, its ETH holdings have no other play besides waiting for the market. There’s no new narrative or extra cash flow to support it; it relies purely on price recovery to break even. This passive situation is completely different from Strategy’s active portfolio adjustments. When ordinary investors look at institutional holdings, don’t just focus on the break-even number. Pay attention to what they bought, their cost basis, and whether there’s room to maneuver. Understand these before deciding whether to follow. Who do you think will fully turn positive first, BTC or ETH? A $400 million short squeeze exploded in 4 hours after a two-day surge The green in accounts over the past two days was forcibly filled by shorts getting liquidated. According to Coinglass data, $446 million was liquidated across the network in the past 4 hours, with shorts accounting for $425 million and longs only $21 million, a heavily one-sided ratio, almost entirely squeezed out by a single bullish candle. The past 24 hours were even more extreme, with 137,000 people liquidated globally, totaling $1.234 billion. The largest single liquidation occurred on Hyperliquid's BTC-USD, a single $25.1387 million position wiped out instantly—one account worth several lifetimes for an average person. This squeeze came fiercely, rooted in Bitcoin’s 16% rally over two days. Many were still placing short orders at high levels betting on a pullback, but the market didn’t turn back, triggering stop-loss orders in a chain reaction, transferring shorts’ money directly into longs’ pockets. For trend followers like us, this kind of sharp rally is the most feared; if your position isn’t set properly, you can easily get thrown off. Watching an account go from unrealized profit to liquidation in an instant is brutal—the higher the leverage, the more devastating the loss, with margin calls triggering immediate forced liquidation. The market impact is direct. Forced liquidation of short positions means passive buying, which in turn pushes prices higher, creating a stampede feedback loop, causing the price to rise quickly and sharply. Short-term selling pressure above is actually lighter, but many long positions are bloodied chips that could flip at any time. The key focus now is whether Bitcoin can hold the 74,000 level; if it stabilizes there, this squeeze can be considered over. If not, a retracement is likely to wash out those chasing the highs. Resistance lies around previous trapped positions, where many are waiting to break even or take profits. On-chain data shows this rally is mainly driven by short covering rather than new spot buying, meaning the quality of the rise is diluted. Once the short covering force is exhausted, sustaining the rally by momentum alone will be difficult. So don’t be fooled by the screen full of green thinking the trend has fully reversed; transaction structure and capital flow are more honest signals. Take the calls in the chat group with a grain of salt. Looking longer term, this kind of stampede liquidation often signals a mid-trend phase, not a top. Historically, similar situations have been followed by another extension wave, but the process is always volatile, with retracements and spikes that shake confidence. If you have unrealized profits, don’t get cocky; if you haven’t entered yet, don’t rush to chase. Wait for a retracement to the moving average or average cost line for a safer entry. It’s better to earn less than to catch a falling knife. Use only a small portion of your spare funds for positions, and don’t let the idea of overnight riches cloud your judgment. Did your short positions hold through this squeeze, or were you already liquidated and forced out?This is not a joke, but a market rule repeatedly tested: in every sentiment cycle, DOGE's movements often occur earlier and more aggressively than the rally of mainstream coins, effectively acting as the market's "risk appetite thermometer." Why DOGE? Because its value anchor is not in technical narratives or ecological applications, but almost purely on emotion and attention. People buying DOGE are not buying fundamentals, but the expectation that "everyone wants to buy." This means its price elasticity follows retail investors' wallets completely—institutions won't heavily hold it, market makers won't support it, and every big bullish candle is a vote of real investor sentiment. So when DOGE moves, it means the most hesitant and latest investors outside the market are already losing their patience. Using it as a metric makes the logic very clear. The rise of mainstream coins may just be driven by institutional allocation, but it doesn't prove whether retail investors have returned; And when $DOGE, DOGE trading volume, and DOGE search heat all rise together, it means incremental retail funds are truly entering the market—this is the most crucial link in a bull market. In other words, a BTC breakout is a "signal flare," while DOGE's takeoff is a "confirmation letter." But this thermometer is also a double-edged sword. Historically, DOGE's extreme excitement often appears in the middle to late stages of market rallies. By the time the market starts talking about DOGE, sentiment is often approaching the peak of overheating. So it serves both as a bull market confirmation signal and as a warning sign of a stage top. For traders, rather than chasing DOGE high,A command to send dollars directly to your email In the early hours of yesterday, a platform called AllScale quietly launched a command-line tool. You just need to type one command in the terminal to send a stablecoin to any email address, and the recipient doesn't even need to register or have a wallet. The recipient just clicks the link, and the money is in their hands. This is quite striking in the current context. Over the past week, everyone has been talking about how AI is siphoning liquidity from crypto, how Nvidia is spending big to acquire teams, and how Bitcoin has surged to 75,000 riding on US debt buybacks. The default assumption is that AI and crypto are two camps competing for the same pie. But AllScale has erased the boundary between these two camps. It calls itself a self-custodied stablecoin digital bank, and this tool is already on npm under the package name @allscale/cli. As long as your environment can run shell, you can install and use it. Its operation is straightforward. On the receiving end, you send a command with the recipient's email and amount, and the system generates a money-bearing claim link supporting USDT or USDC, with no wallet address required from the recipient. On the paying end, it's even easier: you just approve a one-time quota, and then the script can run unattended, automatically creating links and funding payments each time. It also has a crucial engineering design: idempotency, so failed tasks won't cause duplicate payments. In other words, a program running on a server can now collect money, pay money, and reconcile accounts by itself, with no human supervision needed. This perfectly hits the hottest trend recently. Not long ago, AWS's Bedrock enabled AI agents to make micro-payments directly using USDC via the x402 protocol; Stripe just acquired BVNK to integrate stablecoins into its settlement network; Elon Musk's X also wants to use USDC to pay creators. Everyone says AI will need to spend money, but mostly it's still a playground for big companies. AllScale has turned this capability into an installable package anyone can use, returning standard data formats and a bunch of exit codes that machines can directly interpret for branching logic. The interesting part is this: while we are still debating whether crypto will be siphoned off by AI capital, AI has quietly made crypto payments its own foundation. Stablecoins, once only touched by speculators, have now become infrastructure callable with a single command. So here’s the question. When money can flow so easily from one program to another, are the mnemonic phrases we hold now more secure, or more dangerous?Bitcoin's market cap quietly surpasses Meta to take the 13th spot globally This morning, there was a subtle scene. Bitcoin's market cap quietly climbed to $1.5 trillion, pushing the social media giant Meta down and taking the 13th seat on the global asset market cap leaderboard. Ethereum hasn't been idle either, with its market cap rising to over $280 billion, surpassing Dell to rank 72nd. Something supported purely by code and consensus has grown larger than Zuckerberg's company—no one would have believed this a few years ago. You might not grasp what $1.5 trillion represents. Globally, only gold, a few oil giants, and companies like Microsoft, Apple, and Nvidia rank above it. A network with no CEO, no headquarters, and no one who can shut it down now sits at the same table as the hardest assets on Earth. This kind of event would be considered abnormal in any textbook. There's a hidden twist in this surge. In the past four hours, the entire network saw liquidations totaling $446 million, with short positions accounting for $425 million—meaning a bunch of short sellers were directly wiped out. The more crowded the shorts, the stronger the rebound; this market specializes in defying all doubts. Another detail worth pondering: Coinbase CEO Armstrong said today that clear U.S. crypto regulations might be finalized by mid-September, either with the Senate passing a bill with over 60 votes or the CFTC and SEC jointly issuing new rules. Once implemented, Bitcoin will officially be welcomed from the wild west into the mainstream hall. A few months ago, who would have thought mainstream institutions would even look at it seriously? The contrast is actually in the current atmosphere. In just two days, Bitcoin has risen over 16%, reclaiming the 200-day moving average for the first time since last November. The community is jubilant, some calling it the eve of a bull market, sharing their profits nonstop. But on the other side, the Federal Reserve is still in turmoil over whether to raise interest rates—Musallam wants to hike, Daly says hold on, the market foundation isn't that solid. At its core, the narrative has changed. People used to treat it as a speculative asset; now BlackRock clients swept up $120 million worth of Ethereum in two hours, and pension funds are quietly entering. Its asset attributes are being revalued. Bitcoin's market cap surpassing a trillion-dollar tech giant is superficially a price increase but essentially a change in identity. What I'm more curious about is another matter. Now that Bitcoin's scale rivals the world's top companies, can it still maintain that wild, high-profit growth? Or once fully integrated into traditional finance, will its most captivating wildness disappear? This is more worth discussing than today's ranking.Traditional futures giant openly challenges market newcomer Yesterday at the CFTC roundtable in Washington, a rather dramatic scene unfolded. Terry Duffy, the head of the world's largest futures exchange CME, openly confronted Luana Lopes Lara, co-founder of the prediction market platform Kalshi, in front of a room full of regulators and industry peers. Duffy's attack was direct. He first questioned whether prediction markets undergo regulatory scrutiny as rigorous as that of formal exchanges, then sarcastically mocked Kalshi's hot dog eating contest contracts, and dropped a harsh remark saying CME is not the carnival barker outside the circus. The implication was clear: you newcomers don't belong on the big stage. Simply put, CME relies on centuries of trust and licenses, while prediction markets are built on blockchain transparency and grassroots traffic—two fundamentally conflicting logics. Lara did not back down. She responded straightforwardly, saying that traditional markets and exchanges themselves harbor risks, and regulation should focus on identifying and controlling those risks rather than just targeting newcomers. The tension between the two sides was palpable. Later, DraftKings' CEO stepped in to mediate, urging both parties to stop attacking each other's business models. Ultimately, the dispute is not just about words but about who will hold the future financial narrative. Behind this verbal clash is a battle between old and new forces fighting over the same territory. Prediction markets have exploded in recent years, with Kalshi and Polymarket turning sports, elections, and various real-world events into bettable contracts, gradually eroding the traffic and narrative of traditional exchanges. Established giants like CME cannot sit still and thus openly exposed the conflict at the regulatory meeting. Don't underestimate this business: just political election contracts alone saw billions of dollars wagered on-chain last year, and traditional brokers are certainly anxious. What’s more delicate is that regulatory attitudes themselves are divided. A few days ago, a Washington state judge ordered Kalshi to halt certain contracts, but the CFTC then allowed Kalshi to continue trading, directly defying New York state's blockade. Between federal and state authorities, and between traditional and crypto camps, it’s still undecided who holds the final say. This tug-of-war also shows that prediction markets have grown too big for traditional powers to ignore. Whoever first secures the rule-making authority will control the next generation of financial gateways. So this quarrel, on the surface, is just some sharp words, but at its root, it is an instinctive counterattack by the old financial order against on-chain prediction markets. Whether the parties will escalate or regulators will provide clarity remains to be seen.Let's talk about why BTC has surged recently? This BTC surge is heavily catalyzed by U.S. Treasury bonds. But it's not a simple "U.S. bonds fall → BTC rises"; the real logic is: The U.S. Treasury starts actively repurchasing long-term bonds → expectations of declining long-term Treasury yields → weaker dollar → marginal easing of financial conditions → non-sovereign assets like BTC/gold get repriced. This logic has already been directly traded by the market these days. On August 19, the U.S. Treasury announced increasing the scale of long-term bond repurchases from about $2 billion each time to $4 billion. After the news, long-term Treasury yields dropped about 10 basis points, the dollar weakened, and BTC and gold rose simultaneously. The Treasury's sudden increase in long-term bond repurchases essentially sends a signal to the market: The U.S. government does not want long-term interest rates to continue spiraling out of control. So the market started trading on "long-term rates peaking/financial conditions improving." More importantly: the dollar is also falling. This is actually what I consider a more important part of this BTC rally. Currently, the dollar index has dropped to around 98.7, hitting a three-month low. So now there is a very typical combination: Long-term U.S. Treasury yields ↓ + DXY ↓ + BTC ↑ + Gold ↑ This is much more significant than BTC rising alone. Because it shows the market is not trading a typical crypto narrative, but rather: The actual attractiveness of dollar assets is declining. Hence, gold and BTC are strengthening simultaneously. Short term: very bullish for BTC. Long term: it cannot yet be directly interpreted as "the Fed starting to ease." If the 10-year Treasury yield continues to break below 4.7%, BTC may rise further DeFi single-day inflow up 9%, TVL breaks $83.3 billion On-chain data unexpectedly gave a strong boost. DeFi's total locked value surged 9.15% in one day, reaching $83.3 billion, and DEX trading volume exceeded $10 billion for the first time in two months. After nearly a year of bearish on-chain conditions, it feels like the market is catching its breath. Behind the numbers are people. TVL basically represents the money locked in protocols; a 9% increase means tens of billions of dollars flowed back into lending, trading, and staking contracts within a single day. The DEX volume breaking $10 billion is even more critical, indicating that it's not just whales arbitraging but genuine retail investors actively trading on-chain. The last time we saw this kind of heat was in Q4 last year, with lending and swapping as the first sectors to see capital inflows. Don't rush to conclude that the bull market is back. This surge is highly synchronized with Bitcoin's 16% rise over two days, basically driven by the overall market beta, not a new engine within DeFi itself. On Hyperliquid, whale positions have already piled up to $6.028 billion, with a long-short ratio of 0.94, nearly balanced, showing leveraged funds are re-entering but without a clear directional bias. Meanwhile, Optimism DAO recently had a huge dispute over the ownership of 547 million OP tokens, with the core team reallocating 24% of the circulating supply from airdrops to a strategic fund; the community governance issues are far from resolved. The on-chain recovery is real, but foundational cracks remain unpatched, which is the area to watch closely. That said, a rise in TVL doesn't necessarily mean token prices will increase. Many protocol revenues and token holders remain decoupled; just because more value is locked doesn't mean blind buying is wise. What truly benefits holders are real cash flows like buybacks and dividends, not just on-paper numbers. For traders, this data has two interpretations. In the short term, TVL and DEX volume recovery usually lead protocol token sentiment, supporting established tokens like UNI and AAVE in the near term. But on-chain markets are fast-moving; chasing after a big green candle risks getting trapped, and waiting for a pullback before entering is safer. In the long run, DeFi's fundamentals are strengthening. RWA (Real World Assets) bring government bonds and stocks on-chain, stablecoin settlements are being adopted by traditional giants like Mastercard, and tokenized assets are no longer just empty talk. Regulation has shifted from crackdown to framework establishment, with the SEC granting exemptions for financing under $5 million. The foundation is indeed more solid than the last bull cycle. Of course, don't get carried away; on-chain recovery is just that, recovery, and position management remains key—don't mistake a rebound for strength. This $83.3 billion could be the start of a reversal or just a breather following the broader market. Have you made any moves on-chain recently? Samsung's biggest shareholder return plan in history is here! Is it a positive or a disappointment? Samsung has finally officially announced the long-rumored shareholder return plan. It is expected to return 90 trillion to 110 trillion KRW to shareholders by 2026, approximately $79 billion, which accounts for half of its free cash flow. The figures set a record in South Korea. In Q3 alone, cash dividends were 30 trillion KRW, and there will be a 15 trillion KRW buyback used for employee compensation. This is real cash. However, personally, I think this basically meets expectations with no big surprises. The market had previously expected around 100 trillion KRW, and now it falls within this range, representing the upper limit of the promised amount, not an additional increase. Also, the buyback portion is for employee compensation, not direct cancellation, so its help in boosting earnings per share is discounted. Compared to SK Hynix's previous 40 trillion KRW direct cancellation, Samsung seems to be following the trend. But Samsung has a net cash balance of 167 trillion KRW, a stronger foundation and more sustainability. Before the news came out, the stock price had already risen, but it fell 3.9% after hours, indicating some chose to take profits. When the Korean stock market opens on Monday, it will likely open higher because the scale is indeed large and will boost the index. But after a high open, it tends to decline, and chasing the price after expectations are met carries significant risk. If the KOSPI opens more than 1.5% higher, I suggest watching first and not rushing to buy. #BTC加速拉升，资金还能继续接力吗？ CZ calls for tokenizing BNB holders to increase by 370% monthly CZ has spoken again, this time advocating for tokenizing everything. He said that tokenization is one of the best ways for countries to raise funds and attract foreign investment, rhetorically asking which company wouldn't want to sell its tokenized shares globally. This isn't the first time CZ has stood up for the industry, but this time he raised the stakes by pushing for tokenizing everything, effectively grouping RWA, equity, and debt markets into one basket. The words are blunt but make sense, and upon reflection, it's quite interesting. He specifically cited data from BNB Chain to back his point. On-chain RWA holders have reached 776,000, increasing about 370% in 30 days. This number is quite striking, showing that people are genuinely using on-chain assets, not just talking about it. However, he also acknowledged a problem: tokenization spread across multiple chains will fragment liquidity. His own view is that as long as there is high interoperability between different issuers, fragmentation can be alleviated. But reality isn't that simple. If a stock is split into versions on a dozen chains, with buy and sell orders scattered, depth will be diluted. Institutions and retail investors want to trade easily, not piece together orders from a dozen pools. CZ says this is the fastest way to advance the industry, which is true, but the cost is real. Looking back in the space, the Winklevoss brothers just spent $240 million to acquire 18% of Zcash's total network hash rate, and Grayscale has hyped Zcash's privacy features as a necessity in the AI era. Big players are increasingly explicit in betting on tokenization. These moves add up to more than isolated experiments; a visible consensus is forming. On a bigger scale, this tokenization trend isn't just CZ's idea. Mastercard recently acquired BVNK for stablecoin settlement, Franklin Templeton plans to put tokenized assets into traditional funds, platform X is discussing paying creators with USDC, and even traditional exchanges are competing for this market. Regulators are loosening up too; the SEC's new rules provide exemptions for token sales under $5 million. Both big and small money are flocking to this path. Ultimately, selling tokenized stocks globally sounds grand, but implementation faces two main hurdles: differing compliance standards across countries and how to reconcile on-chain and off-chain clearing and settlement. CZ's vision is appealing, but the challenges are tough. For us, the signal is clear: tokenization is no longer just a concept; it's infrastructure in progress. In the short term, public chains like BNB Chain that lead the way will reap benefits, and the RWA narrative will continue to be hot. In the long term, whoever can re-aggregate fragmented liquidity will hold the true moat. Do you think tokenized stocks can really be sold globally, or is this just another round of PPT hype? Bitcoin rose 16 points in two days, short sellers got squeezed Has your account turned green this week? If you’ve been watching the market without moving for the past two days, you should be able to feel that long-lost heat. Bitcoin posted two consecutive big bullish candles, rising a total of 16.66% over two days, with its market cap climbing back above $1.5 trillion. Many people were still debating whether to cut losses last week, and this week they’re already asking if they can still chase the rally. This all started on Wednesday. Trump released a series of positive signals at the crypto event in the White House. On Thursday, the US CFTC’s Innovation Advisory Committee held its first meeting, with founders and executives from Coinbase, Uniswap, Ripple, a16z, Solana, and others all sitting in the audience. This time, regulators weren’t there to impose restrictions; Chainlink’s Nazarov said on the spot that the CFTC and SEC have finally started to cooperate seriously, with much less of the previous infighting. The market’s biggest fear is uncertainty, and now the signals have reversed. For traders like us, the market impact was direct. Bitcoin climbed from 72,000 to above 75,000, finally unlocking the 840,447 BTC position in Strategy back to breakeven, with an average cost of $75,385. The current price just passed that threshold; previously, unrealized losses had once exceeded $10 billion. Shorts are having a hard time—just in the past hour, $222 million worth of short positions were liquidated. In this short squeeze, the worst pain isn’t losing money but being force-liquidated and missing the rally. Ethereum didn’t lag behind either; ETH reclaimed a key resistance zone and its rally strength even surpassed Bitcoin’s. But don’t be dazzled by a single bullish candle. In the short term, this move was driven by a resonance of sentiment and news—one sentence from Trump, one CFTC meeting could ignite the market, indicating that selling pressure above isn’t heavy, but also that the foundation is still shaky. Technically, the 50-day moving average is around 63,900, and the 200-day moving average is about 69,000. For Bitcoin to truly confirm a golden cross and declare a bear-to-bull transition, the 50-day MA needs to firmly cross above the 200-day MA, which hasn’t happened yet. To be frank, such single-day surges have been seen many times in bear markets, often followed by new lows. Until it can hold above the 200-day MA, all rallies should be considered mere rebounds—don’t mistake luck for skill. The long-term logic is clearer: the US dollar index has dropped to its lowest since May, US Treasury repo operations are pushing down long-term yields, and the story of scarce assets is gaining believers again. Institutions are putting real money in; spot BTC ETF daily trading volume broke $5.3 billion, with BlackRock alone accounting for over 80%. For those still holding on stubbornly, this week finally offers a breather. But the question is, is this breath the start of a reversal or just a big rebound in a downtrend? What’s your take?Gemini fell from 3.3 billion to 450 million—who's snapping it up? This morning, an unassuming suggestion brought together two worlds that originally had nothing to do with each other. ARK Invest's research director Lorenzo publicly called out, saying Hyperliquid should buy Gemini and turn it into a compliant perpetual contract platform based in the U.S. A decentralized protocol running on-chain swallowing a listed exchange regulated by both the SEC and CFTC—no matter how you look at it, this scene feels a bit surreal. The person saying this isn't speaking casually. Hyperliquid is currently negotiating with the CFTC and SEC, aiming to provide trading and clearing of perpetual contracts on public blockchains for U.S. compliant institutions. This protocol, which started with on-chain perpetual contracts, has been gaining strong momentum this year; its token once surged above seventy dollars and was even mentioned by Trump in a speech as a model for U.S.-based compliant perpetuals. What it lacks is not users, but a license to legitimately enter the U.S. market. Looking at Gemini, this exchange that only went public in September 2025 was valued at 3.3 billion USD at IPO, but now its market cap is only about 450 million, down over 85%. Its core business has been shrinking; it has exited the UK, EU, and Australia markets, cut staff from a peak of 402 to about 240, platform assets dropped from 18.2 billion USD to 8.4 billion, and spot trading volume fell by two-thirds. Once a competitor to Coinbase, it has now reached a point where it needs to sell itself to survive. Yet, this storm-tossed company has become a hot commodity in the eyes of another group. The reason is straightforward: its U.S. licenses are extremely valuable. The New York Department of Financial Services trust license, CFTC-regulated DCM and DCO, ongoing FCM license, money transmitter licenses in almost every state, plus broker-dealer qualifications—all packaged together could be acquired for about 450 million USD. For comparison, Kraken's parent company paid up to 550 million to buy Bitnomial, making Gemini overall cheaper. What would the buyer inherit? Approximately 580,000 monthly active trading users, 1.72 million lifetime users, 8.4 billion in platform assets, 3.8 billion in quarterly spot volume, and about 180 million in annual revenue. For an on-chain protocol like Hyperliquid, this is a shortcut to bypass lengthy compliance processes, effectively exchanging over four years of time difference for a ticket to enter the market. Interestingly, neither side in this story is a traditional winner. On one side is a listed company with collapsing valuation and shrinking business; on the other is a rising on-chain newcomer not yet fully accepted by regulators. One wants to buy a license, the other wants to sell itself to survive. So the question arises: can a decentralized protocol really swallow a dual-regulated listed exchange? Will regulators allow such a hybrid structure? Or is this more like a public test probing what the future of compliance looks like? On-chain ambition meets real-world licenses—will the outcome remain just talk, or will it truly rewrite the industry we know?Just experienced a historic liquidation in Bitcoin, but selling pressure has quietly bottomed out In the past two days, Bitcoin has gone through a violent fluctuation that made shorts cry and longs suffer, with a single-day increase once surging over 8%, forcing many shorts into liquidation. Amid this lively scene, an institution called 21Shares released data that calms things down. Their tracked seller exhaustion indicator currently reads about 0.007, within the lowest 0.3% range since 2010. In plain terms, this means that the people willing to dump their holdings in the market are almost out of steam. This indicator measures the loss level and selling pressure intensity of short-term holders; the lower the value, the fewer people are still cutting losses. This is the 11th time in Bitcoin's history that such an extreme reading has appeared, and the previous 10 times all occurred at the market's most desperate, bearish moments. Why is this indicator being highlighted now? Because in recent weeks, Bitcoin has been hammered down from a high, with short-term holders transferring large amounts of coins to exchanges to take profits, and panic is everywhere on-chain. But the data shows that the chips that can still be dumped are decreasing, and long-term holders are not panicking and running away. Even more interesting are the subsequent statistics. 21Shares found that after each of the previous 10 similar signals, the price was higher one year later, with a median increase of 155%. In other words, every time the market was this pessimistic, it later rewarded patient holders well, and many in the community are already watching the charts to find the bottom. Interestingly, at the same time this indicator lit up, Bitcoin just rallied from 72,000 to 75,000, the price hasn't cooled off yet, but the selling pressure has already eased. Such a mismatch between price and sentiment is rare in history and usually marks the time of greatest divergence. However, they also poured cold water in their report, saying this indicator does not mean the bottom is confirmed; in the short term, prices could still dip further before gradually reversing. After all, on the macro side, the Federal Reserve is still divided, with voices calling for both rate hikes and cuts, and no one can say when liquidity will truly return. Our sentiment here is also quite divided. On one side, whales are quietly offloading, while on the other, BlackRock's clients swept over $100 million worth of ETH in two hours. At times like this, when a cold, hard indicator says selling pressure has bottomed, do you trust the data or the hands selling on the market?US Treasuries Are Being Frenziedly Sold Off, But the Fed Says It's Fine US Treasuries have been hammered pretty hard these past couple of days. Long-term yields briefly surged to their highest level since 2007, and the market is shouting everywhere that policy credibility is about to collapse and the dollar is going to have problems. However, two Fed chair-level figures came out to smooth things over, saying don't panic; the rise in long-term yields is mainly because the government needs to borrow money for AI infrastructure and to fill fiscal holes, not because inflation is out of control. But while the Fed verbally reassures, internally it’s already divided. Daly from the San Francisco Fed leans dovish, thinking inflation and employment data are stable enough and there’s no strong reason to raise or not raise rates. Meanwhile, Musalem from St. Louis Fed leans hawkish, saying core inflation is still stuck high between 2.5 and 3, and he actually wanted to hike rates at the July meeting. More subtly, at that July meeting, three members opposed keeping rates unchanged, so the division is now out in the open. Why are long-term bonds being so heavily sold? The root cause is supply and demand. The US Treasury is doubling down on buybacks to support the market while simultaneously issuing massive amounts of debt. The AI giants’ financing frenzy has also grabbed a big chunk of funds, and Japan’s buying has weakened marginally. There aren’t enough buyers to take it all, so long-end yields can only rise. This kind of structural pressure can’t be pushed back just by a few words from the Fed. How is the market pricing this now? The probability of a rate hike in September has dropped from over 70% at the end of July to about 30%, meaning most people are betting the Fed will likely hold steady this year. But the dollar index has already been hammered to its lowest since May. A weaker dollar, in turn, is boosting scarce assets like Bitcoin, as capital naturally seeks assets that can avoid debt expansion. For us, in the short term, this is just an emotional seesaw. When Treasury yields spike, risk assets tremble, and BTC can’t escape either. Don’t be fooled by today’s rally; a yield jump tomorrow can scare off the bulls. At times like this, don’t load your positions too full—keep some ammo ready for sudden dips. Looking longer term, the script becomes clearer. Fiscal deficit expansion combined with a weakening dollar is exactly the strongest fuel in Bitcoin’s long-term narrative. Every round of debt ceiling tug-of-war acts as free advertising for scarce assets. In the short term, watch the Fed’s mood; in the long term, watch debt trends. These two logics rarely align so well. Do you think the Fed can really hold the line this time, or is the dollar story already over? Share your judgment in the comments.The Tokenization Supercycle of U.S. Stocks: Robinhood's CEO Steps In Personally Robinhood's boss Vlad recently made a bold statement on CNBC, saying we are standing at the dawn of a supercycle. He wasn't talking about whether Bitcoin will rise tomorrow, but about the entire U.S. stock market moving onto the blockchain. In his words, this is no longer a concept—it's happening right now. The concrete actions have already been implemented. About a month ago, they launched their own chain overseas, listing 190 U.S. stock tokens, supporting 24/7 trading, and allowing free on-chain transfers just like Bitcoin. This directly brings U.S. stock investment opportunities to people in over 120 countries. In his view, stock tokenization is not simply moving stocks onto the chain; it's about rebuilding the foundation of the financial market. This matter is closer to our crypto world than many think. In recent years, everyone has been focused on BTC and ETH, thinking Wall Street is far away and that the two are separate systems. Now, with tokenization breaking down the three walls of trading hours, asset transfer, and global access, it's like connecting the traditional market's faucet directly to the blockchain. In the long run, this creates a new capital inflow for the entire crypto asset space—not just a zero-sum game within the pool, but new external funds coming in. Of course, don't get too excited too soon. Robinhood's system is currently only running overseas; the regulatory red line in the U.S. hasn't been crossed yet. Whether the CLARITY Act passes and how much the SEC approves will determine how much capital can actually flow in. In the short term, this is just a narrative catalyst; real money inflows will have to wait for compliance. Don't rush in and go all-in on concept coins just because you hear "supercycle." What's even more interesting is the posture of the giants. Traditional players like BlackRock and Fidelity are discovering that spot ETFs are siphoning off spot pricing power, while quietly laying out on-chain infrastructure. Old money and new chains are shaking hands. The entry of institutions at this level is not comparable to the early days of shout-trading communities. Do you think U.S. stocks going on-chain is a gimmick or a real trend? If one day you could use USDT to directly buy on-chain shares of Apple or Tesla, would you take action? Share your judgment in the comments.Bitcoin Breaks Through $74,000, Shorts Buried Overnight Bitcoin surged sharply in the short term, just around 9 AM today, the price directly broke through $74,000, with a 24-hour increase close to 8%. This level has created a significant gap from the low point at the end of June, and many people's accounts finally recovered some losses this week. ETH was also active, rising alongside Bitcoin, and the altcoins that were hit hardest collectively caught a breather. Even the long-silent BSC veteran meme coins rebounded by 30%. Behind the market are actually two opposing forces. On one side, last week's epic short squeeze forced the liquidation of over $3 billion in short positions, with more than $1 billion of opposing positions wiped out within just one hour. Short sellers were forced to close their positions under pressure. On the other side, spot ETF funds are providing support. Yesterday alone, spot Bitcoin ETF trading exceeded $5.3 billion, with BlackRock accounting for over $4.4 billion. Institutions are entering with real money; this volume is not something retail traders can generate by hype alone. Interestingly, 21Shares just released data showing Bitcoin seller exhaustion indicators have dropped to the lowest range of 0.3% since 2010. Historically, this reading has appeared 11 times, and in the previous 10 instances, the average gain over the following year was 155%. On-chain signals also support this: wallets holding over 1,000 ETH have decreased by about 1.7 million ETH in three months. The mainstream explanation is that these coins were staked and locked up, indicating long-term holders are accumulating rather than fleeing. Zooming out to the macro level, the US dollar index has fallen to its lowest since May, and the US government is doubling down on long-term bond buybacks to support the market. The narrative of scarce assets avoiding debt expansion is gaining believers again. In the short term, this means risk appetite has returned, and capital is willing to flow into higher beta assets. But let's be cautious here. The open interest on perpetual contracts has returned to highs not seen since last October, indicating leverage is quietly building up again. This is when sudden spikes and stop-loss hunts are most likely. Also, since the daily death cross in October last year triggered a correction, this rebound is the first decent one but has not yet confirmed a reversal. Don't mistake a rebound for a full bull market comeback. For those of us trading waves, $74,000 just broke through, and chasing now risks getting stopped out by spikes. A safer approach is to wait for a pullback to confirm the 4-hour average cost line holds before following in. The long-term logic is actually much clearer than in the past two months. Are you free from losses on this wave, still holding on, or just had your shorts flushed out and staring blankly at the screen? Let's discuss in the comments whether this round is a bull return or a dead cat bounce.U.S. stocks opened broadly lower while crypto stocks bucked the trend and rose Last night at the U.S. market open, the Dow Jones fell 0.72%, the Nasdaq dropped 0.67%, and the S&P 500 declined 0.38%, with all three major indexes opening lower. People in the crypto circle watched the market and noticed a strange phenomenon: the indexes were all green and falling, but their own crypto holdings were red and rising. Yet at the same time, a group of crypto-linked stocks moved in the completely opposite direction. Strategy rose over 8%, Coinbase gained more than 7%, Circle increased over 5%. Even at the close, Coinbase ended up 5.8% higher. More eye-catching was SK Hynix, which rose over 3% following JPMorgan's prediction that it could return at least $130 billion to shareholders by 2027. Normally, these stocks move in sync with the Nasdaq. This is not the first time. The day before, these crypto concept stocks surged collectively due to Bitcoin's rebound and short covering. The logic then was straightforward: when the coin price goes up, related stocks fly. But yesterday was different; the broader market was clearly falling, yet these stocks moved against the trend, indicating that the driving force is no longer solely the coin price. This is the interesting part. For a long time, crypto stocks were basically followers of tech stocks; if the Nasdaq sneezed, they caught a cold. Now, as the broader market weakens, they are standing firm. Is it that traditional capital is starting to treat crypto as a separate sector to bet on, or is it just short-term hot money looking for an exit? It's still unclear. Zooming out a bit, the timing of this divergence is also notable. Gold just broke through $4,500 to hit a new high, the dollar is weakening, and both safe-haven and inflation-hedge assets are being bought. Whether crypto stocks' counter-trend move is riding the same logic or have their own independent narrative, the market has yet to provide an answer. JPMorgan remains skeptical about U.S. Treasury buybacks, believing the Treasury's doubled buyback is a stopgap, not a solution. Meanwhile, crypto-related assets are quietly strengthening, and the dollar is weakening. These two forces are pulling in opposite directions, leaving the market somewhat directionless. For those of us holding coins, the biggest concern isn't how much a particular stock rises. It's that when crypto stocks start to decouple from tech stocks, it suggests mainstream capital's view of this asset class may really be changing. Companies like Strategy are essentially leveraged substitutes for coin prices; the more they are bought, the more it shows that some are indirectly allocating to crypto through the stock channel. But how long this divergence can last, no one can say for sure. What do you think? Is this a true signal that crypto assets are being accepted by the mainstream, or just another wave of emotion-driven pulses?#BTC is accelerating its rally, can the funds continue to take over? The market heat is indeed still good now. Vic talk previously said that reaching seventy to eighty thousand this year would be pretty good, and now it seems that seventy to eighty thousand is coming much faster than many people imagined. But I think we shouldn't be blindly optimistic. On one hand, there's still some distance from eighty thousand, and it may not be as easy to break through as it has been these past two days. On the other hand, the two hard indicators I have been continuously monitoring have not yet risen. The USDT lending rate on AAVE hasn't gone up, indicating that on-chain demand hasn't been ignited. OKX buying U hasn't shown a premium, indicating that fund inflow is not obvious.

Orbit Topic Sitemap