Orbit Post Sitemap
BTC's return above 64000 is indeed encouraging, but I'm not in a hurry to treat the round number as a confirmed breakout. Currently visible on the homepage, BTC is up about 1.24%, ETH is down about 0.12%, and popular discussions focus on BTC returning to 64000 and the ETF buying still having a temperature difference; the price has crossed the line, but capital resonance has not yet appeared. Next, I am only watching three things: whether BTC can continuously hold above 64000, whether spot trading volume expands synchronously, and whether ETH can stop falling and climb back near 1900. If BTC rises alone on thin liquidity, the pullback will be quick; if trading volume strengthens in sync with ETH, the breakout will be of higher quality. How long do you think BTC needs to hold above 64000 at minimum to confirm a valid breakout? $ETH $BTC #闪迪收涨逾8%，长期协议受关注
The core reason behind SanDisk's recent rise is the market pricing in the long-term contract model. It has already signed multi-year supply deals with 8 cloud providers, with guaranteed contract volumes close to $94 billion. Most of the production capacity for the next two years has been locked in advance, effectively hedging part of the cyclical risk.
The market showed strong volume growth today, with capital speculating on the new narrative of "de-cyclicality" in the storage industry, combined with expectations for AI data center storage demand, leading to a clear increase in institutional attention.
However, there are realistic risks. The current stock price has already priced in a lot of optimistic expectations. Whether the long-term high gross margin targets can be realized and whether customers will adjust their purchase volumes later still need to be gradually verified. The old problem in the storage sector remains unchanged: once competitors ramp up production, price pressure can return at any time.
In the short term, this is a sentiment-driven rally fueled by positive news. The price level is not low, so avoid blindly chasing the rise. Focus on tracking the progress of long-term contract implementation and the trend of flash memory spot prices.
This is only a personal market record and does not constitute any investment advice. THIS IS INSANE
Someone opened a $115 million $BTC short with 40x leverage.
He is now just $560 away from liquidation.What is truly suppressing BTC is not the shorts: the 5.32% U.S. Treasury yield is re-pricing global assets.
BTC is still fluctuating around $64,000, but the wall above is getting higher: the U.S. 30-year Treasury yield recently surged to 5.327%, a new high since 2007.
More importantly, this is no longer just a "Fed rate hike or not" trade.
#XiaomiEarningsWatch #30YYieldHits2007High #SanDiskLongTermDeals $DOGE and $PEPE followed the $BTC market down, but currently BTC and some major altcoins have recovered most of their losses, with a rebound significantly stronger than DOGE and PEPE.
The fact that BTC and major coins can quickly recover after a drop indicates that there is capital willing to buy at the lower levels, whereas high Beta assets like DOGE and PEPE, which have relatively weaker liquidity, lack sufficient buying support after a decline, so their prices naturally tend to stay low.
Truly strong coins are not just those that fall less, but those that have buyers rushing in after the drop.$SKHYNIX SK Hynix 1181, dropped from 1269, a single bearish candle fell by 7%. The news says it joined the "SSD original price refund" list — to translate, out of stock means no replacement, just a refund. This only indicates one thing: severe shortage in storage production capacity, suppliers would rather refund than compensate with goods. Essentially, this is a strong signal of high industry prosperity. 😂
But the price doesn't agree, directly falling from 1269 to 1162. SAR=1267.76 pressing overhead, EMA21=1187 just broken down, EMA55=1145 supporting below. KDJ's J value is only 9.32, K=39, D=54, RSI6=37.81, close to oversold. This is a classic divergence of fundamental bullishness + technical oversold — such divergence often means opportunity.
Hynix is different from SanDisk, it is the HBM leader, the core supplier for Nvidia, the most direct beneficiary of storage price increases. If AI storage is really a long-term trend as Morgan Stanley says, Hynix has no reason to be worth only 1200.
Comment below, is Hynix at 1180 an opportunity or a trap? I plan to place a long order at 1150, stop loss at 1120, target 1250. Those who missed SanDisk, if they miss Hynix again this time, they really can only blame themselves. 🔥
Those who chased high at 1269 are now calling Hynix trash. But have you thought, if it really falls to EMA55 at 1145, would you dare to catch it? Those who dare not catch it will forever only be chasing highs and cutting losses. Show your orders to speak.The Federal Reserve did not raise interest rates in July, but the long-term bond market did it for them.
The 30-year US Treasury yield surged to around 5.31%, hitting a new high since 2007; the 10-year yield also reached about 4.72%.
Seeing this, my first reaction is not "high yields are great," but rather: how expensive must funding become before lenders are willing to keep lending to the US?
With the fiscal deficit expanding and long-term bond supply increasing, AI companies are also aggressively issuing bonds to grab funds;
Meanwhile, China, the UK, and Japan are simultaneously reducing their US Treasury holdings.
The buyers haven't disappeared, but they require higher yields to be willing to take on the bonds.
What's more troublesome is that as US-Iran deadlines approach, tensions have not eased, and oil prices are actually rising.
Rising oil prices push up inflation expectations, which in turn keep long-term rates elevated.
Short-term rates are still waiting on the Fed meeting minutes, but long-term rates have already started pricing in fiscal pressure and term premiums.
High yields will suppress tech stock valuations and also raise BTC's funding costs; gold has safe-haven support but must simultaneously contend with real interest rates.
If severe volatility occurs, the first to get hurt are often those with high leverage.
So at this point, I won't rush into 30-year long bonds just because a 5.3% coupon looks attractive, nor will I hastily bottom-fish risky assets.
I prefer to reduce leverage, keep ample cash, hold short-duration bonds first, and wait for oil prices and the meeting minutes to clarify the direction.
In the past, everyone bet on rate cuts; now what we really need to guard against is that long-term rates simply refuse to come down.
$BTC $XAU $CL
#30年期美债收益率创2007年以来新高 The surge after the NBIS earnings report reminded me of a devilish detail. Previously, the big short Burry chose to short the stock directly instead of buying put options because the implied volatility of $NBIS put options exceeded 100%.
Now, this direct shorting, unlike options which can effectively limit losses, theoretically can cause unlimited losses. NBIS has rebounded so much from the bottom, and its market cap is only 70 billion, not a large-cap stock.
And at this very moment, his counterparty is exactly Citadel, which just took down the new AI stock god Leopold?In one week, the probability of a rate hike in September dropped from 59% to 35%. CME FedWatch now shows a 65% chance of no change.
CPI at 3.4%, PPI fell from 5.5% to 4.7%, July retail sales -0.6% (expected +0.1%), Michigan consumer sentiment at 51 (expected 54.7). All four data points missed; what basis does Walsh have for a rate hike?
Last week many were shouting "Walsh is hawkish and determined to hike," but this week, as the 13F filings came out, institutions voted with their feet—Jane Street increased its BTC ETF holdings by 630 million. Smart money doesn’t believe in rate hikes; only those who trust the data are truly smart money.
Walsh stubbornly says "there is no soft inflation target," but without new data before September, the three dissenting votes can’t overturn the decision. Wednesday’s FOMC minutes are the last chance for a hawkish show, but the minutes are based on old July data, which the market has already priced in.
I’m putting my flag down: no rate hike on September 16. Holding 20% of my base BTC position at $64,202; Walsh’s hawkish talk won’t scare me.
#FederalReserve #Walsh #CPI与PPI同步降温，加息分歧扩大 SanDisk suddenly surged over 8% yesterday. Looking at the market and news after hours, the core reason is still that long-term agreement at work. Honestly, the storage sector was hit pretty hard recently, and the market has been worried that the cycle would head downward again. Everyone holding chips was quite nervous.
But with this long-term agreement coming out, it’s like directly putting insurance on future cash flow and shipment volume. For a cyclical industry like storage, the biggest fear is wild price swings and uncertain orders. Having such deeply tied big orders not only stabilizes the performance baseline but also steadies capital expenditures.
My feeling is that the market had been overly pessimistic before, so as soon as the negative sentiment eased, short covering combined with capital rushing in pushed a big bullish candle. However, chasing the high still requires caution; a rapid short-term rise is prone to volatile shakeouts.
I’m currently stuck in a short position, sigh, been trapped for several days. If you’re just thinking of entering now, it’s better to wait for a volume contraction and a pullback to confirm support rather than blindly catching the falling knife. #闪迪收涨逾8%，长期协议受关注 最近后台问得最多的一句话是 比特币都跌破6万5了 是不是熊来了 我特别理解这种焦虑 就像谈恋爱的时候对方消息回得慢 你第一反应从来不是他在忙 而是他是不是不爱我了 但你把视线抬高一点看 会发现钱其实一分都没少 它只是从一个房间走到了另一个房间 数据摆在这 截至2026年8月初 借贷平台和DEX上的RWA存款规模来到74亿美元 一年前还只有23亿 翻了三倍多 RWA现货交易量同比涨了大约220% 代币化股票的市值一年之内跳了422% 代币化债券和货币基金涨了83% 整个代币化RWA的分布式价值已经站上330亿美元 三年前这个数字还不到30亿 以上为公开统计口径 非实时行情 大家自己复核 再看今年三月纳斯达克那个规则变更 代币化的罗素1000成分股和主流ETF可以上交易所交易 而且和传统股份完全可互换 这句话很短 但它的意思是 链上和所谓传统金融之间那堵墙 已经被拆到只剩一层纸 所以我的判断是 这一轮不是资金撤退 是资金挑食了 以前大家买币 买的是一个叙事 现在机构买的是现金流 是收益率 是能光明正大进资产负债表的东西 BUIDL JTRSY sUSDS 这些名字听着一点都不性感 但它们在The increase in BTC dormant for over ten years does reinforce the scarcity narrative, but using it to explain short-term price swings is excessive. Currently, the homepage shows BTC up about 0.20% and ETH down about 0.19%. Hot topics include discussions about dormant supply hitting new highs, while also mentioning repeated ETF buying and leveraged bull crowding; Supply contraction and demand shortages are happening simultaneously. I value three verifications more: whether long-term wallets continue to accumulate net deposits, whether net inflows from exchanges have suddenly increased, and whether spot trading resumes when BTC rebounds. If the old chips remain unchanged but new buyers also fail, the price may still move sideways; If exchange inflows rise, the scarcity narrative will be interrupted by short-term selling pressure. Do you think the more important thing right now is the amount locked in positions or the new buying opportunities? $ETH $BTC Today, I watched the market repeatedly. What really warned me was not that $BTC was still at 64,000, but rather a very unusual combination: the 30-year US Treasury yield surged to 5.321%, the highest since 2007, while gold still stood above $4,400. Logically, the higher the long-term interest rate, the greater the pressure on a non-yielding asset like gold. But now both are strengthening together, indicating that the market is trading more than just "whether the Fed will raise rates next time," but a longer-term issue—fiscal deficits, government bond supply, energy inflation, and geopolitical risks are all raising long-term risk premiums. The situation in Hormuz has pushed Brent crude back to $91, which is another key variable that keeps long-term bond selling pressure on hanging low. (Reuters) So I won't simply interpret this wave of gold as a safe-haven rally. It's more like the market is buying insurance for money and sovereign credit. This is crucial for $BTC. If gold is strong and US Treasury yields are strong, but $BTC can only be ground in the 62,000–66,000 range, it shows that at this stage, funds still treat $BTC more as a "liquidity-sensitive risk asset" rather than as fully digital gold. If I really want to see a logical upgrade, I'd rather wait for $BTC to break out independently in a high interest rate environment. Looking at SanDisk is even more interesting. $SNDK rose about 35% in the first five trading days, then another 8.7% in a single day. What truly boosted the market wasn't just the phrase "AI storage," but rather its start to reduce NAND's most lethal cyclicality through long-term customer agreements, while forecasting a mid-high for FY2028–2030Starlink August 18 Market Analysis
The whole day was full of negative news, with Middle East conflicts approaching the Mandeb Strait, and the Red Sea situation escalating again. At the same time, the 30-year US Treasury yield surged directly to a 19-year high. But there is a strange phenomenon: BTC is stubbornly stuck above 64000 and simply won't fall below.
Why is there a divergence between the market and the news? Actually, there are two reasons.
The first reason is that the Red Sea skirmishes have been going on for more than half a year, and the market has grown numb to geopolitical conflicts. As long as the Strait of Hormuz is not directly blocked, triggering a sharp oil price surge, this level of negative news is not enough to move the funds.
The second reason is that the real negative impact of the rising US Treasury yields is on US tech stocks, while BTC's current pricing weight heavily depends on the Nasdaq's performance. Liquidity in the Asian session during the day is too thin, and the main players who would push the price down are not active; the real decisive battle will be at 9:30 PM when the US stock market opens.
Looking deeper, the 64000 level has already shifted from resistance to a bullish defense line. On the 4-hour chart, the volume pulled back from 62400 was large, gathering a lot of long positions and stop-loss orders here. For short sellers, trying to break through this defense line by hammering a few hundred points during the Asia-Europe session is too costly.
The strategy for the second half of today is very simple, just watch two boundaries. If the US stock market crashes tonight and BTC decisively breaks below 64000 and cannot recover within 15 minutes, the bearish trend is confirmed, and the next targets are 63500 or even 63000. If BTC withstands the negative news tonight and breaks above 64600 or even 65000 with volume, it means the bearish logic is completely disproved, and no short positions should be taken today.
The current price is 64200, right in the middle, neither a buy nor a sell point. Trading is like this: the noisier the news, the more you need to control your hands. Set your stop-loss firmly at the boundaries and leave the rest to the US market open tonight to choose the direction. Execute if the position is given; if not, stay out and watch the show. $BTC $ETH $SOL #闪迪收涨逾8%，长期协议受关注 #Strategy上周出售3.34亿美元股票，提高美元储备 The 30-year US Treasury yield surging to 5.3% has significantly raised the risk-free rate anchor, and the resonance with massive AI debt issuance is squeezing the discounting space for overvalued assets.
On August 13, the 30-year Treasury auction yield reached a high of 5.216%, with a bid-to-cover ratio of 2.39 indicating weak buying demand, and selling pressure in the secondary market transmitted smoothly. This changed market expectations for the risk-free yield floor, and the overall rise in long-term funding costs is simultaneously pushing up the financing discount rates for US growth stocks, long-duration bonds, and highly leveraged assets.
In terms of driving factors, the US fiscal deficit and rising interest costs are the primary theme, with AI debt supply reaching about $250 billion so far in 2026 and heading toward $500 billion for the year acting as a marginal amplifier, and Japanese government bond yields resonating at high levels ranking third. Tech giants’ spending impulses have pushed corporate borrowing to longer durations, causing US Treasuries and corporate bonds to absorb the same pool of institutional asset management funds.
Under the easing scenario, if yields fall back from the 5.3% peak and AI commercialization revenues exceed expectations, valuation pressure on long-duration assets will be relieved. The trigger conditions are a slowdown in Treasury issuance pressure or the Fed signaling long-end liquidity release, with the bid-to-cover ratio needing to rebound above 2.5. Once long-end yields break through the multi-year high of 5.3%, this easing scenario immediately becomes invalid.
Under the downward revaluation scenario, if long-end yields remain above 5.3% and AI debt continues to surge, high discount rates will induce valuation contraction in tech stocks and risk assets. The trigger conditions are accelerated realization of the $500 billion AI debt supply and worsening Treasury underwriting pressure, with the variable to watch being whether corporate bond issuance spreads widen. If policy interventions effectively suppress long bond yields, this downward scenario will be invalidated.
Cross-market transmission has spread from the Treasury market to all risk asset classes. When the 30-year Treasury offers a risk-free return above 5%, risk premiums for stocks and high-risk assets must be repriced, and long-term growth stories face challenges amid higher funding costs.
The most important variables to watch over the next 7 days are whether the 30-year US Treasury secondary market yield can stabilize below 5.3%, and whether secondary market spreads widen when tech companies issue bonds subsequently.
#BTC沉睡供应创新高，稀缺性再受关注 #SPCX持股结构曝光，哈佛13F重仓The competitors of $BTC and ETH are no longer other tokens.
In the past, competition in the crypto leverage market happened internally—new public chains and new narratives took turns challenging the two giants, but the capital always circulated within the crypto space. This time is different: challengers come from outside the chain. SpaceX-related tokenized derivatives generated over $50 million in liquidations within 48 hours, with a scale once second only to BTC and ETH; meanwhile, the perpetual contract trading volumes of both dropped to multi-quarter lows, with capital flowing into contracts related to stocks, gold, commodities, and private companies.
The core change is that the boundary of "tradable assets" has been broken. Previously, ordinary traders had no channel to bet on unlisted companies like SpaceX; now, on-chain contracts have turned stocks, bulk commodities, and private equity exposure into 7×24 hour leveragable trading products. Traders’ attention is zero-sum; for every additional traditional asset available for round-the-clock trading, the capital pool for BTC and $ETH is diluted a bit.
Of course, the other side of the surge in liquidation volume is intense volatility. These new contracts lack mature depth and risk control, so short-term hype does not equal long-term market share. But the trend itself is worth noting: when the entire traditional world can be traded on-chain, the roles of BTC and ETH may shift from "the entirety of the crypto market" to "two among many collateral types." Whether they can maintain their core position in the leverage market depends on whether there are unique narratives that no one else can offer—and currently, this question remains unanswered.BRC-2.0 brings EVM functionality into the Bitcoin ecosystem, but this does not mean Bitcoin is stealing the smart contract narrative from $ETH.
Let's look at the facts first: BRC-2.0 was activated at block height 912,690, integrating EVM-compatible execution capabilities into the BRC-20 indexing system. In theory, developers can write more complex contracts and applications around Bitcoin assets. However, it must be made clear: it does not embed EVM into Bitcoin's consensus layer; contract logic is mainly interpreted and executed by off-chain indexers. This is fundamentally different from Ethereum mainnet's native contract security model—the former relies on indexer consensus, while the latter relies on full network consensus.
Therefore, the real highlight is not the "support for EVM" label, but that the $BTC ecosystem is lowering the barrier by borrowing Ethereum's developer experience. Whether it can generate real liquidity depends on three things: whether indexers can form a trustworthy consensus, whether the security boundaries of off-chain execution are accepted by the market, and whether developers are truly willing to build applications.
In the short term, this is a narrative-level probe; in the long term, only when contracts on Bitcoin can withstand real financial tests will the "narrative takeover" be valid. For now, it looks more like a supplement rather than a replacement. 1. Crypto Market Strengthens Against the Trend BTC powerfully climbs above $64,357, with a single-day increase of 2.2%, and total market capitalization returns to 2.28 trillion; ETH follows suit, stabilizing above 1910, up 1.7%, showing an independent rally supported by safe-haven funds. 2. U.S. Stocks All Fall, Major Indexes Turn Red Dow Jones, S&P, and Nasdaq all close lower, with stock market appeal sharply declining. The root cause lies in a major shock in the bond market: The 10-year U.S. Treasury yield surged to 4.72%, The 30-year U.S. Treasury yield soared to 5.31%, hitting a nearly 19-year high since 2007! Long-term bonds face massive sell-offs, pushing long-term risk-free rates significantly higher, directly suppressing stock market valuations. 3. Safe-Haven Hard Assets Rally Across the Board Geopolitical tensions continue to be priced in by the market, triggering a large-scale migration to safety: Gold and crude oil both rise, with substantial funds withdrawing from stocks and bonds, flocking into value-preserving hard assets. Summary in One Sentence Long-term bond yields surge historically, U.S. stocks weaken under pressure; geopolitical risks intensify, funds flee to safety, making Bitcoin, gold, and crude oil the best current safe havens. $BTC $ETH Friendly reminder: Market review is for communication only and does not constitute any investment advice #财报观察员：小米即将发布财报，你更看好哪条业务线？
What I am more optimistic about is Xiaomi's automotive business line. It's not that smartphones and AIoT are unimportant, but what Xiaomi currently lacks is not a stable profit-generating foundation, but a second growth curve that can truly elevate the company's scale to the next level.
Smartphones remain Xiaomi's base. In Q1, smartphone revenue was ¥44.3 billion, with global shipments of 33.8 million units. Although shipments declined year-over-year, the ASP has risen to ¥1310, a historic high. Simply put, the most worth watching about Xiaomi phones now is not how many more units can be sold, but whether the move toward high-end can continue to rise.
I actually think AIoT is the most easily underestimated part of Xiaomi. In Q1, IoT and lifestyle product revenue was ¥24.7 billion, with a gross margin of 25.2%, and connected devices have exceeded 1.1 billion units. TVs, air conditioners, tablets, wearables, plus smartphones and cars — Xiaomi is no longer just making individual products, but gradually piecing together a "people-car-home full ecosystem."
In Q1, smart cars, AI, and other new business revenue approached ¥19.9 billion, of which automotive revenue was about ¥19 billion, with deliveries of 80,856 vehicles, a year-over-year increase of 6.6%. This quarter also coincided with the discontinuation of the old SU7 and the transition to the new generation model, so the quarter-on-quarter data alone doesn't look very good. But what I care more about is what scale Xiaomi Auto can reach after the new SU7 and YU7 ramp up production again.
@OKX中文 The total market cap is stuck between 2.1 trillion and 2.2 trillion, unable to rise or fall. Bitcoin is relatively resilient, hovering above $64,000, occasionally showing small bullish candles. Mainstream altcoins like Ethereum, Solana, and XRP are basically treading water or even continuing to grind down. The most common phrase in retail investor circles is: Bitcoin is performing solo again, while altcoins collectively play dead. Let's look at the broader environment first. The Federal Reserve is firmly holding interest rates at 3.50% to 3.75%, and Goldman Sachs has clearly stated that the likelihood of a rate hike in September is very low, citing weak retail sales, nearly stagnant employment, and inflation still trending downward. This sounds positive, but the market just isn't responding. The 30-year US Treasury yield has hit a new high since 2007, making funding costs frighteningly high. For retail investors, this means the opportunity cost of buying crypto has increased—money placed in bonds can earn decent interest, so why take a beating in the crypto market? Bitcoin is currently the relatively safest choice in retail portfolios. Not because it’s about to surge, but simply because there’s no better alternative. The price is oscillating between 62,000 and 65,500, with support looking decent but resistance also significant. On-chain data shows whale addresses are slowly accumulating at low levels, while retail wallet activity is pitifully low. This “smart money buying, retail waiting” pattern has appeared several times before and often leads to a rally, but only if there’s a catalyst. The biggest catalyst now is when the Federal Reserve truly eases or if US regulatory bills can be passed. Until then, The valuation race between OpenAI and Anthropic is no longer just startup funding news
This is the anchor for the entire AI industry chain
Anthropic's revenue growth, IPO expectations, OpenAI's commercialization, and executive changes are all telling the market one thing: model companies no longer just sell imagination; they are forced to deliver real growth, gross profit, customer retention, and organizational stability
I think the most dangerous aspect of this AI valuation round is that everyone assumes "fast revenue growth" naturally equals "profit will appear"
But model inference costs, computing power investment, talent loss, and enterprise client bargaining will gradually erode the myth. The private equity market can price based on scarcity, but the public market will ask very basic questions: for every dollar earned, how much computing power and salary must be burned
AI giants can be expensive
It's just that the more expensive they are, the less they can fear being scrutinized by financial reports
#Anthropic年化营收达650亿美元 $FIL's sharp drop today is not due to sudden negative news but a concentrated outbreak of old problems. When the overall market slightly pulls back, it falls harder than others.
1. Continuous selling pressure from miners is the biggest root cause
Miners have to pay electricity and data center costs, and they need to sell FIL for cash once unlocked. The lower the price falls, the more miners have to sell to maintain operations, creating a vicious cycle of falling prices and selling pressure that never stops.
2. Underwhelming adoption, funds unwilling to enter
The decentralized storage story is talked about, but actual commercial orders are few. Most computing power is idle with no real paying business. Currently, market funds are flowing into DeFi and AI concepts, leaving the storage sector unfavored by capital, resulting in weak buying pressure.
3. Technical breakdown triggering stop-loss orders
Previous support levels were directly broken, triggering many stop-loss orders, accelerating the downward pressure. The overall market only slightly fluctuated today, but without buying support for FIL, it experiences a small market dip with a large drop in FIL.
4. Worsening market consensus
Many trapped holders try to exit at any small rebound, causing heavy selling pressure during rebounds. It's difficult to sustain an upward trend; most rebounds are short-lived and followed by continued decline.
In short: This coin is characterized by weak rebounds and sharp declines. Even occasional rebounds are mostly technical corrections. A real reversal requires solid business improvements, which are hard to see in the short term.
Practical advice: Do not lightly try to catch the falling knife. Even for short-term trades, strictly set stop-losses.
#财报观察员：小米即将发布财报，你更看好哪条业务线？ $SNDK In-Depth Trade Review: Correct Trend Judgment, Entry Timing Mistake, Low Leverage Holding Logic Closed Loop
Overnight, $SNDK entered the expected technical correction zone. The overall short position game this round shows: the major directional judgment was correct, but the entry timing and scaling-in rhythm had obvious flaws.
Last week, the core logic for this round was locked in advance: Sandisk's bullish main trend has not ended in the short term, and the high level is a structural stagnation correction phase. Therefore, after closing the long position last week, the plan was to wait for a second high-level divergence this week before setting up short positions.
However, on Friday night, the market spiked with a false breakout that induced buying, causing a mistimed entry and premature establishment of the initial short position, a typical case of being deceived by short-term emotional candlesticks.
The second obvious mistake in this trade was invalid scaling-in logic. The scaling-in points did not coincide with divergence or a second pressure confirmation, making it an ineffective scale-in that further diluted the position advantage and amplified unrealized loss fluctuations.
Current position status: full position at 7x low leverage, average price around 1650.
The only correct core decision in this round of operations: proactively reducing leverage for risk control.
Previously accustomed to 50x high leverage trading with very low tolerance for volatility, any adverse movement would lead to liquidation or forced stop-loss exit; this time, deliberately lowering to 7x leverage essentially uses time to gain space in a stable trading system.
Under the low leverage system, I abandoned frequent stop-loss short-term thinking with a very clear logic:
No shorting at the bottom floor, no longing at the ceiling, very low probability of deep counter-trend traps, as long as the major cycle direction is correct, volatility is fully bearable.
The maximum drawdown in this round of holding was nearly 50%, almost wiping out all last week's profits, caused by timing errors leading to significant account drawdown.
But after the overnight correction settled, bearish momentum returned to the market, the structure repaired, the market returned to expectations, overall position pressure greatly relieved, and the trading logic got back on track.
Core Summary
1. Macro directional judgment correct: high-level stagnation correction logic holds
2. Operational mistakes: false breakout candlestick entry, invalid scaling-in
3. Risk control system upgrade successful: 7x low leverage successfully withstood extreme volatility
4. Trading cognition advancement: correct direction ≠ correct timing, stable profits rely on risk control, not win rate
At this point, the darkest phase of this round of holding is basically over, structure has returned to expectations. $SNDK
#闪迪收涨逾8%，长期协议受关注 BTC is up about 1.01%, while ETH is down about 0.31%. This is not a broad rally but a shift of funds back toward defensive assets. The homepage is still discussing BTC's dormant supply hitting new highs, ETF inflows and outflows fluctuating, and the approach of macroeconomic milestones. A predominantly bullish narrative does not mean risk appetite has already expanded. I will first watch three things: whether BTC can hold 63500 as spot trading volume rebounds, whether ETH can reclaim 1900 and reverse its decline, and whether the strength gap between the two coins continues to widen. If BTC remains strong alone and ETH stays weak, the logic for altcoins to catch up falls apart; only if both coins strengthen simultaneously does it look like incremental funds are returning. Would you interpret this round of divergence as BTC siphoning off liquidity, or ETH temporarily falling behind? $ETH $BTC $XBOT launches today, but I won’t be rushing to buy it immediately.
It’s not that I’m bearish on robots.
Precisely because I think the robot narrative is so big, I need to pay more attention to the price.
RoboStrategy itself is a fund investing in robotics and Physical AI companies, with its latest disclosed portfolio including key positions in Figure AI, Dyna, Apptronik, and others.
The problem is:
Many of these are private companies.
The valuations of private companies don’t have real-time public market prices like listed companies such as Nvidia or Apple, so the fund’s NAV inherently involves valuation judgments.
As of June 30, RoboStrategy disclosed a NAV of $10.51 per share.
So when I look at $XBOT, I pay special attention to one indicator:
The market price of XBOT / BOT relative to NAV — how much premium is there?
If everyone is crazily giving valuation premiums because of “Figure AI + robotics + AI,” then be cautious:
What you might be buying isn’t cheap robotic assets, but the market’s high expectations for the future of robotics.
My strategy leans more towards:
Observing liquidity and premium first, then deciding on position size.
Opportunities are never only in the first minute.
Will you choose to buy right at launch, or wait for the market to calm down? #OKX预言家第二季正式上线 $XIAOMI Q2 story is a forced valuation shift.
The cause is the surge in storage chip prices—DRAM and NAND rose nearly 300% year-over-year, and Lu Weibing said this will last at least until the end of 2027.
The transmission chain is clear: storage price increase → mid-to-low-end phone BOM collapse → Xiaomi actively shrinks low-end models → global shipments down 26%, gross margin 8.2%.
The phone business has turned from a growth engine into a profit drag.
But in the same period, car Q2 shipments reached 104,200 units (YoY +23%), with a gross margin of 20.5%. Economies of scale are starting to outweigh price wars. In July, the "Pengcheng" extended-range SUV was launched into the family segment, expanding the product category faster than expected.
The capital market is repricing Xiaomi: shifting from a "phone company" to a "car company." Goldman Sachs forecasts deliveries of 1.036 million vehicles in 2028, and after crossing the one million annual sales threshold, the valuation anchor will be completely changed.
Conclusion: bullish on automotive, secondarily optimistic on internet services (ecosystem monetization layer). Avoid phones in the short term, waiting for a turning point in storage prices.
Please note, risk reminder: consensus expectations do not equal actual disclosures, earnings reports fluctuate sharply, exercise independent judgment.
#财报观察员：小米即将发布财报，你更看好哪条业务线？ $BTC If 63,000 is broken, could it trigger a chain reaction drop to 57,000 USD?
Currently, $BTC is still fluctuating around 64,000, but what leveraged longs really need to guard against is 57,000 USD. Alphractal data shows that a large number of long positions have liquidation prices concentrated around this area.
Once touched, forced liquidations by exchanges could turn a normal pullback into a rapid crash.
The first line of defense is currently 63,200 USD, which is the recent median realized price in the market and has provided support over the past two weeks.
If this level is effectively broken, the June low of 57,800 USD will likely come back into view.
More troubling is that the current open interest relative to volume is high, with many bets on the market, but liquidity to absorb these positions is thin.
This risk does not only come from bearish market sentiment but from the overcrowding of long positions.
Price drops trigger liquidations, and liquidations further push prices down—that is the reason why 57,000 USD is a dangerous level.
However, longs will not necessarily face a chain liquidation.
BTC has held above 62,000 USD despite multiple macro headwinds, and a reverse head and shoulders pattern may be forming on the daily chart.
If confirmed by the market, the target could be 76,000 USD.
Key points to watch are whether 63,200 USD can hold and whether there is real volume during any rebound.
Low volume does not mean low risk; it may actually amplify the next breakout.
#BTC沉睡供应创新高，稀缺性再受关注 #财报观察员：Xiaomi is about to release its financial report, which business line do you favor more? #30年期美债收益率创2007年以来新高 #Stablecoin total market cap hits an all-time high, but altcoins are collectively bleeding, where exactly did the trillion-dollar dormant funds go?🤔
On-chain data reveals a very fragmented magical reality.
The total circulating market cap of stablecoins across the entire network has quietly surpassed $170 billion, setting a new all-time high.
In past bull and bear cycles, continuous expansion of stablecoin scale often indicated that off-exchange ammunition was ready, and the altcoin season could start at any time.
But the market situation completely contradicts old experience: except for BTC and a few top tokens, over 90% of altcoins have not seen a general rise; instead, they continue to lose liquidity and fall into a slow decline.
Why haven't the hundreds of billions of newly issued stablecoins on-chain converted into buying power for altcoins?
The root cause is that the use of stablecoin funds has fundamentally changed.
In the previous cycle, people exchanged fiat for USDT and USDC with a very pure goal: to rush into exchanges, speculate on altcoins, and gamble on meme coins. Stablecoins were purely speculative ammunition.
Now, a large amount of stablecoins no longer flow into secondary markets for trading; funds are diverted into several major directions:
🔹The largest destination: tokenized US Treasuries RWA
Institutions and whales deposit large amounts of stablecoins into interest-bearing protocols like BlackRock BUIDL, earning about 5% risk-free US Treasury yields.
These hundreds of billions of funds lie in interest pools earning interest and will not enter the market to bear altcoin volatility risk.
🔹The second largest destination: cross-border physical trade settlement
In emerging markets in Latin America, Southeast Asia, and the Middle East, USDT is widely used for bulk commodity trading, cross-border remittances, and hedging local currency inflation.
Merchants circulate hundreds of millions of dollars on-chain daily, but they only use stablecoins as a settlement tool and do not participate in token speculation at all.
🔹The third part: institutional low-risk arbitrage
Traditional hedge funds hold stablecoins only for cash-and-carry arbitrage, pursuing stable returns and avoiding high volatility in altcoins.
Thus, a strange situation arises: on-chain dollar liquidity hits a record high, but speculative funds truly willing to bottom-fish altcoins are greatly diluted.
One thing must be clear: expansion of on-chain payment scale ≠ arrival of altcoin bull market buying.
Continuous token issuance combined with massive diversion of speculative funds means the era of blindly bottom-fishing old altcoins waiting to get rich has passed.
Stablecoins keep hitting new highs, but altcoins continue to bleed. Under this fragmented market:
Is your portfolio heavily weighted in BTC + stablecoins for defense, or are you still stuck holding a large amount of altcoins?🚨 DXY JUST BROKE DOWN — MACRO SHIFT IN PLAY! 🔥
The U.S. Dollar Index has hit a 10-week low as weak jobs + retail data crush expectations for more Fed hikes.
💵 Weaker DXY = potential tailwind for risk assets
₿ BTC + major alts could benefit if momentum confirms
⚡ Watch liquidity, order blocks & breakout zones closely
But this isn’t a guaranteed pump — geopolitical risk and rising oil/yields can still flip the setup. ⚠️
The macro battlefield is changing. 👀$BTC $BEAT $OKB What BTC currently lacks has never been positive news
but solid incremental buying power.
Recently, it seems stable around 64000
but the market is actually very cold with a sharp decline in trading volume
volatility has dropped to a multi-month low
On the surface, it looks like it won't fall, but essentially neither bulls nor bears are willing to take the initiative
ETF data is even more convincing
At the beginning of August, BTC spot ETFs briefly saw continuous inflows
but recently have weakened again
From August 12 to 14, net outflows were 61.1 million, 131.1 million, and 56.2 million USD respectively, bleeding for three consecutive days
After macro positive news landed, the price showed no reaction
This fully illustrates that what the market currently lacks most
is real money willing to continuously enter and catch the falling knife. Anthropic’s reported move past $65B in annualized revenue changes the central question from whether enterprise AI demand exists to how durable and economical that demand can become. Preliminary Q2 revenue above $11.5B, versus $4.73B in Q1, is striking, while the $65B raise and confidential S-1 suggest capital formation is advancing alongside growth.
My measured view: a floated $2T IPO valuation will depend less on the headline run rate than on retention, revenue quality and compute costs. The $100B–$120B year-end estimates are investor expectations, not guidance. NFA — do your own work.
#AnthropicARRHits65B$0G No operations, no analysis, just relying on luck, this performance is embarrassing to even say out loud. Opened the market this morning, saw the price repeatedly hovering around 0.1516, unable to rise, volume shrinking, a typical volume-less rebound. I rubbed my eyes and decided to short to test the waters. The result? Now at 0.1485, +42.21%, isn't this just a free gain? Reviewing the trade, it was actually waiting for a high-probability position. The strategy is simple: take profit on 80%, set a protective stop for the remaining 20%, don't let the market take back your profits. The money you make is the realization of your understanding; the money you lose is the flaw in your understanding. Even if you only make one point, as long as you can take it away, it's yours; any floating profit beyond that belongs to the market. If you missed this wave, don't chase it, wait for the next structure to form, I will notify immediately.
$BTC $ETH Nvidia Cuts Guarantees, Broadcom Faces 370 Billion Risk: Who Is Backing the AI Arms Race?
Two pieces of news in the AI circle this Monday:
First, Nvidia slashed the guarantee scale for the OpenAI Ohio data center project under discussion from about $250 billion down to below $120 billion, and now mainly only guarantees the first phase.
Second, Broadcom is also facing issues. The market has started to re-examine the AI financing platforms it participates in, with one of the most sensitive figures being a potential remaining guarantee exposure of up to $370 billion.
On the surface, one talks about Nvidia, the other about Broadcom, seemingly unrelated. But putting them together, you find they both point to a new risk emerging in the AI industry:
As AI data centers grow larger, the real bottleneck is no longer just chips, but who pays, who finances, and ultimately who bears the risk.
Why did Nvidia suddenly cut its guarantee by half?
It's not because it doesn't want to sell chips anymore, nor because AI demand suddenly dropped. On the contrary, the projects still need to continue.
But Nvidia clearly does not want to keep such a large tail risk entirely on its own balance sheet; it hopes to spread the risk more to banks and credit markets.
Broadcom's problem is even more noteworthy.
No one really knows how much the AI assets it guarantees will be worth in the future.
Airplanes can be financed based on residual value because a plane can be used for 20 to 30 years, has a mature secondary market, and decades of historical data.
But AI chips are different. A generation of architecture may become outdated in one or two years, and custom chips don't even have a mature secondary market.
So if you finance a batch of AI equipment for ten years, how much will it be worth three years later?
No one knows.
This is a major change in the AI industry now.
In the past, the market cared about: how many GPUs Nvidia can still sell? How many ASIC orders Broadcom can still get?
Now, an additional question arises:
Who exactly borrowed the money for these hundreds of billions of dollars in data centers? After asset depreciation, who ultimately bears the losses?
US stock investment network believes the AI arms race has now entered its second phase.
The first phase was about chips.
The second phase is about capital.
And the real danger is that risk is gradually spreading from a few highly profitable tech giants to banks, credit funds, and the entire financial system.
If the AI bubble really bursts in the future, the first to explode may not be chip orders but the financing chain.
$NVDA $AVGO $AMD $INTC #存储股财报后下挫，AI内存牛市还稳吗？ Besides Sleeping Coins, there's an extra layer of 'quasi-sleep'. In recent years, a new force has emerged in the Bitcoin market: spot ETFs and listed companies have been continuously buying. Their combined holdings have exceeded 2.4 million tokens, accounting for about 12% of the total supply on the entire network. Once these coins enter ETF trusts or corporate vaults, they are like individual dormant coins and are unlikely to return to the secondary market on a large scale in the short term. Let's start with ETFs. Ownership of these tokens belongs to ETF holders, but the physical tokens themselves are locked by the custodian. It is not actively sold by ETF managers, and redemptions are usually transferred to new holders rather than directly dumped into the secondary market. Its behavior pattern is very close to that of individual sleeping coins. By mid-2026, the total holdings of Bitcoin spot ETFs will exceed 1.2 million, accounting for about 6% of the total mined supply across the entire network. Now, let's talk about listed companies. Strategy is the most typical example, having been continuously buying since 2020 and holding over 840,000 tokens in total. Other listed companies also have allocations of varying scales. Once these coins enter the company's balance sheet, they are valued at market value according to accounting standards and held long-term, making them unlikely to be easily sold off in large quantities. They have withdrawn coins from circulation, but unlike traditional major shareholders, they do not have a strong incentive to reduce their holdings. The purpose of holding Bitcoin is not for short-term trading, but for asset allocation at the balance sheet level. To put it bluntly, these companies buy coins like buying fixed assets—they have no intentionAddress-level statistics cannot be directly interpreted as conclusions at the holder level. On-chain dormant coin data looks very hardcore: 3.56 million tokens, about 17.7%, with the vast majority close to permanent dormancy. Behind this lies an easily overlooked methodological premise: it counts addresses, not people. An address is not equal to a person; this is the most basic understanding of on-chain data. The same person may control multiple addresses: those scattered in different wallets during early mining, those deliberately stored separately for security, or those opening accounts separately on different exchanges all appear as multiple independent addresses on-chain. From an address perspective, these addresses resemble scattered, dormant accounts, but from the holder's perspective, they may be just the same hands behind them. This means that address-based statistics tend to overestimate the number of holders and undervalue the positions held by order holders. The same early participant may control a dozen or even dozens of addresses, statistically a dozen or so independent sleepers, but in reality, it might be just one or two people. Even more covert are the exchange's cold wallet addresses. For security, large exchanges consolidate most user assets into a few cold wallet addresses. These addresses appear on-chain as a few dormant accounts with huge balances, untouched for ten years and staggering amounts, but they are not the private vaults of a wealthy holder; rather, they hold the assets of thousands of users in centralized custody. If these cold wallet addresses are counted in the dormant coin statistics, it would overestimate the actual number of dormant users and distort the judgment of holder concentration. Another easily overlooked category is the hosting service provider's address. Co$OKB has started to pull back, is it an opportunity or a risk?
Previously, OKB experienced a rapid rise and is now entering a retracement phase.
For those interested in participating, it is not recommended to blindly chase the highs. You can focus on two key entry points:
First entry point: Around 94
Reason:
From a daily chart perspective, the previous rise was significant, so a pullback is a normal correction.
Around 94 was a resistance level before the price breakout; after breaking through, resistance often turns into new support.
If the price can stabilize here during the pullback, it indicates strong market support.
Second entry point: Around 90
This level is even more important.
From a larger timeframe perspective, around 90 is near a key moving average support and was previously a level where the price was easily suppressed.
If the pullback does not break this level, it means the long-term trend remains strong.
The potential for further upward movement will also open up.
If the $BTC market remains stable, strong coins like OKB may regain investor attention after stabilizing from the pullback.
(The above is technical analysis and does not constitute investment advice.) Today, the South Korean stock market experienced a typical "rally followed by a pullback, a high dive from a high platform."
KOSPI performance:
Opened over 2% higher in the morning, reaching a high near 7216 points (a 5-day high)
Then quickly turned negative, with losses expanding by the close
Finally closed down about 1.55% at 6869.83 points, ending a 5-day winning streak
The main drag came from profit-taking in heavyweight stocks: Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix both surged early but then fell back, causing the index to plunge sharply. The intraday range between high and low exceeded 300 points, showing very volatile swings.
External factors also played a role: U.S. stocks closed lower last night, and oil prices rose again due to Middle East tensions, heightening market concerns over geopolitical risks and inflation, prompting investors to take profits.
Overall, today looked more like a technical correction and cooling of sentiment after consecutive prior gains, rather than a trend reversal. Semiconductor and memory-related themes remain intact, but short-term risks of chasing highs have emerged.
Sentiment in the Korean market has turned cautious; further attention is needed on foreign capital flows and tonight’s U.S. stock performance.It tells you the future, not tomorrow. Since there are so many Sleeping Coins, does that mean the price will take off tomorrow? This idea sounds logical, but in reality, it confuses two completely different things: long-term narratives and short-term signals. Sleeping doesn't mean prices will rise tomorrow; Scarcity doesn't mean it will be immediately reflected on the market. Let's first talk about what sleeper coins are really telling the market. What it tells the market is: the potential selling pressure in the future is extremely limited. 3.56 million dormant coins, the vast majority nearly permanently dormant, and about 17.7% have exited the price—these numbers mean that no matter how the market fluctuates, the amount of tokens that could actually be dumped is much smaller than the circulating volume. This judgment is structural, cross-cycle, does not fluctuate with short-term prices, and does not easily fail due to a single black swan event. No matter how bulls and bears switch, whether the price drops from 60,000 to 30,000 or surges to 100,000, the behavior pattern of these dormant tokens remains generally stable. This judgment itself is not a trading signal that tomorrow will rise. So why can't it be directly passed on to short-term prices? Because the holders of the sleeping coins are simply not present. They don't watch the market, don't trade, and don't respond to price signals. Their behavioral patterns are two different logics from 'go long or not.' No matter how many dormant coins there are, there is almost no direct causal relationship between tomorrow's price, the next week's trend, or the month's trading volume. Even if you see Dormant Coin suddenly jump 10% today, tomorrow's market won't be the sameDormant coins are exiting S2F pricing. Many enthusiasts of Bitcoin valuation frameworks will be exposed to the S2F model. This model measures the ratio of stock to new inventory and is used by many analysts as an anchoring tool for long-term price forecasting. But few realize that sleeper coins are quietly rewriting the effective stock of this model, secretly adding layer after layer of invisible scarcity to the entire valuation framework. Let's start with the S2F model itself. It measures the ratio of existing to newly minted Bitcoins: the numerator is the total amount of Bitcoin mined (stock), and the denominator is the number of new Bitcoins mined each year (traffic). Dividing the two yields a ratio. The higher this ratio, the larger the reserve pool corresponding to each newly mined coin, making the scarcity stronger. In summary, the question is: at the current production rate, how many more years will it take to produce this batch of stock? For example, after the 2024 halving, the supply will gradually climb from about 19.7 million tokens, and by mid-2026, it will exceed 20.07 million tokens, with an annual increase of about 164,300 tokens (450×365), and the S2F ratio will remain around 120, which is even higher than gold. Bitcoin's theoretical limit is 21 million coins. 21 million is the hard ceiling for this model. But this figure is the theoretical total, not the actual tradable market volume, and certainly not the actual amount involved in pricing within the model molecules. The stock that can truly enter molecular pricing is shrinking. Currently, about 17.7% of Bitcoin is dormant沉睡不是暂时状态，而是接近永久的结局。 某个沉睡十年的地址突然被唤醒，币被一次性转走。 这种新闻每隔一段时间就会出现一次，可这只是表面上的小概率事件，并不代表沉睡币的真实命运。 长期跟踪数据会告诉你一个反直觉的结论：沉睡十年以上的地址，其持有的比特币被重新激活的比例极低。公开链上记录显示，绝大多数（远超九成）长期沉睡币在多年跨度内始终没有动过，真正被唤醒的只是少数。 这意味着什么？ 意味着绝大多数沉睡币已经高度接近失去作为可交易资产的身份。 它们仍然存在于区块链上，但现实世界里可能已经没有人有能力把它们卖出去。从市场角度看，这部分币已经从潜在筹码的名单里大幅划掉。 那这个绝大多数不再醒来的判断，靠谱吗？ 靠谱，而且相当稳健。 这个判断并非基于某次抽样调查，而是过去多年链上每一次唤醒事件的公开记录。每一次沉睡地址被激活的记录，都公开写在区块链上，谁都可以验证。 这些年里，比特币经历过完整牛熊切换、减半、几次重大黑天鹅事件，而长期沉睡群体的净增加趋势始终稳定，真正大规模唤醒只是偶发事件。 这种跨周期的稳定性，本身就是一项重要信息，它说明沉睡是一个由结构性因素决定的长期现象，而不是某个周期阶Their "irrationality" is precisely the most rare trait in the market. Many people watching dormant coin addresses have the same question: from the bottom of the 2022 bear market, to the halving correction in 2024, and then to several black swan events, the vast majority of people behind these on-chain addresses never moved. Is this loyalty, or stubbornness? Let's start from the bottom of the 2022 bear market. At that time, the entire crypto market was in a panic, Bitcoin briefly fell below $18,000, and most short-term traders had already sold their losses and exited. But the vast majority of the coins in those long-dormant addresses remained untouched. Even when the book floating losses once exceeded 70%, the holders behind it still chose to remain silent. Then to the mid-stage adjustment of the 2024 halving rally. After the halving, market expectations diverged, and some new institutions chose to reduce positions during phased drawdowns. But this group of addresses still didn't budge at all. Even when the coin price pulls back 30% or 40% from its peak, they still choose to hold their positions and not sell. Several black swan events have also been interspersed in between: exchange collapses, regulatory raids, and liquidity crises. Every time there is a drop, people shout, "This time it's really over," but the vast majority of dormant addresses remain silent, with almost no change in the balances on those addresses. This almost stubborn behavior seems rather irrational from an outside observer's perspective. Selling losses in bear markets, taking profits in bull markets, switching hotspots, and updating narratives—these should be basic actions for a normal trader, yet these people do nothing. But if you switch to the perspective of behavioral finance, this irrationality is evidentVolatility and Sharpe Ratio Comparison
Annualized volatility: $BTC 23.3% > $ETH 19.7%, $BTC is naturally more volatile; but Sharpe ratio: $BTC 2.79 > $ETH 2.27, meaning $BTC still delivers more return per unit of risk.
In plain language: $BTC is a wild horse that runs fast but can be reined in, $ETH is a gentler mule but slower. Choose $BTC for efficiency, $ETH for peace of mind—depends on what kind of rider you are.
Capital Attraction Comparison
Funding rates: $BTC 0.0059%, $ETH 0.0046%, both longs pay, so $ETH has lower holding costs.
Cumulative net inflow: $BTC -82.7 million (net outflow), $ETH +128.6 million (net inflow). $ETH has increased open interest for two consecutive days, while $BTC has reduced positions for two days in a row. From the capital perspective, the funds backing $ETH this round are clearly more solid.
Conclusion: Don’t rush to change your position yet. Capital is a slow variable, price is a fast variable. $BTC won in a week, $ETH may need to catch up slowly through capital inflow—now is not the time to go all-in on $ETH, wait until it breaks 1,918 first. Tuesday, 2026.08.18
The 30-year US Treasury yield rose to 5.29%, reaching the highest level since 2007, indicating a significant increase in the market's pricing of long-term risks, with heightened concerns about inflation stickiness, the Federal Reserve maintaining high interest rates, and the sustainability of massive fiscal deficits and debt. Meanwhile, Japanese bond yields are also rising, signaling global economic risk warnings.
As of August 17, Bitcoin ETF data is currently incomplete, but overall it should be a net inflow.
Market Analysis
Bitcoin finally showed some movement yesterday, rebounding along with the US stock market. Although it rebounded, it did not break out of the consolidation range. One thing that can be fairly certain is that in the short term, Bitcoin is unlikely to experience a significant drop (barring macroeconomic emergencies). It has been consolidating at the bottom for two months, which, according to historical theory, somewhat fits the characteristics of a bottom. Given the opportunity, it should be possible to bottom-fish; patiently waiting for a drop, which might be the last decline.
US stock storage stocks continued to rise sharply yesterday but quickly pulled back today. This kind of correction is normal, but it is unclear whether it is just a correction or a rebound peak. Overall, the US tech sector or AI sector still needs to be observed. As long as the correction is within 10%, there is no major issue; if it exceeds 15%, caution is advised.
Cryptocurrency Fear and Greed Index: 37 (Fear) First, the verdict: BTC vs ETH earning ability comparison, verdict $BTC slightly better
In this 7-day PK, $BTC slightly wins: returns +1.04% vs +0.71%, drawdown 0.9% vs 1.1%, Sharpe 2.79 vs 2.27. $BTC earns more, loses less, and after risk adjustment still outperforms $ETH.
But don't miss a detail: $ETH today had a net inflow of OI +119 million, while $BTC actually saw an outflow of 113 million. Smart money is moving towards $ETH. Short-term earning ability favors $BTC, but the capital undercurrent is $ETH's game—this wave is like a short drama where the villain pretends to be dead first, and the protagonist makes a comeback at the end, so don't rush to take sides.
Comparing returns and drawdowns
Normalized curves: from 8/12 to 8/16 both brothers were flat (lowest $BTC 99.1, $ETH 99.8), on 8/17 both took off ($BTC highest 105.7, $ETH 105.8), on 8/18 both fell back. Closing prices $BTC 101.04, $ETH 100.71.
Returns $BTC +1.04% > $ETH +0.71%; max drawdown $BTC 0.9% < $ETH 1.1%. Gains more than you, falls less than you, this round $BTC is the favored child.大家知道为什么这10几年来，各种代币你方唱罢我登场，而唯有比特币岿然不动，一个代币就牢牢占据着整个加密市场里一半的市值吗？因为比特币只做一件事，那就是极致的安全和去中心化，它牺牲了效率，把自己完整地交给了社区，换来了极致的抗审查，因此只有它才可以做到绝对可信任，且任何人可验证的点对点的去中心化价值传输。 其他所有代币做的事情，都有竞争者，它们为了适应更残酷的市场竞争，不得不牺牲部分的去中心化。因为在市场竞争里，你需要有高效的决策系统，快速迭代，否则就会被竞争对手超越——这是天然的不对等，比特币可以慢，所以可以放弃效率，选择极致的安全和去中心化，系统价值可以无限高；而其他所有代币都不被允许慢，慢就是死，因此它们不得不在另一条“稍微跑得慢一点就会被人们抛弃”的赛道上奔跑。 我知道很多人会疑惑，为什么别人不能复刻一个比特币呢？黄金或许不可复制，但比特币的机制为什么不能一模一样做一个呢？比如马斯克黄仁勋这样一呼百应的名人，要复刻一个很难吗？ 我的问题是，那为什么十几年了，没有另一个微信呢？它不仅仅是先发优势这么简单，还有无数绑定在上面的经济系统，生态，和利益，最简单的，你想让美国政府把几十万枚#30-year US Treasury yield hits highest since 2007 Long-term rates have surged again, with the 30-year US Treasury yield reaching a new high since 2007. Just saw the data: the 30-year US Treasury yield briefly surged to 5.29%-5.32%, directly hitting the highest level since 2007, while the 10-year yield is also around 4.72%. The debt scale keeps growing, long-term bond supply pressure, persistent inflation, plus multiple countries reducing US Treasury holdings and the AI financing boom competing for funds, have all pushed long-term rates higher. Japan is also selling government bonds, indicating this is not just a US issue. Financing costs have risen, which will transmit to stocks, gold, and crypto markets. Gold $XAUT is clearly under short-term pressure, while BTC remains quite resilient. If long-term rates continue to fluctuate at high levels, will everyone favor gold as a safe haven, or will BTC continue to act as "digital gold" to resist volatility? Summary: 1. Opportunity cost rises: US Treasury risk-free yield surpasses 5%, government bonds can outperform inflation. Bitcoin itself generates no interest, so the opportunity cost of holding BTC rises significantly, and funds tend to flow into government bonds. 2. Real yields rise: The 10-year US Treasury real yield has reached 2.41%, up from only 1.77% two years ago; rising real rates increase pressure on non-yielding risk assets. 3. Asset performance divergence: Over the past year, Bitcoin fell 46%, while gold rose 32%, showing fund divergence, with some safe-haven funds choosing gold over Bitcoin. 4. Impact on BTC: The higher the US Treasury yields, the more pressure on BTC; high yieldsMi'er, can your stock curse be broken?
#财报观察员：小米即将发布财报，你更看好哪条业务线？
The market expects revenue to be about ¥111 billion to ¥127.1 billion. Whether it can hold above ¥100 billion is not very important; what matters is whether the automotive segment can withstand the pressure.
Although monthly deliveries exceeded 30,000 consecutively in Q2, deliveries do not equal improved profitability. The main focus is whether the automotive gross margin can stabilize, whether operating losses can narrow, and whether the annual target of 550,000 vehicles can be achieved.
In the smartphone industry, Q1 saw a year-on-year decline of 19.2%, but the average selling price rose to ¥1,310, a record high. In Q2, rather than focusing on shipment volume, it is better to see if premiumization can continue to support ASP and gross margin.
AIoT and internet services are Xiaomi’s profit ballast. If IoT gross margin and internet advertising revenue continue to remain resilient, they can buffer the pressure from rising smartphone costs and automotive investments.
The most likely combination in the earnings report is: revenue recovery, but profits still under pressure.
Xiaomi has never lacked impressive data in the past. The real "stock curse" lies in the market often trading growth in advance, then after the earnings report lands, instead questioning profits and guidance.Peter Schiff is once again calling for Bitcoin to drop, but this time he himself says he's "confused"
Peter Schiff's statement this time is rare—he directly says he is confused by Bitcoin not dropping recently.
A person who has been calling Bitcoin a top/zero for over a decade admits to being "confused," which is more worth pondering than his $65,000 resistance level.
His logic is: $65,000 is the key level; breaking above it leaves limited upside, breaking below it is the real downside risk, and the current rebound is exactly the window for long-term holders to sell.
It sounds like technical analysis, but essentially it's narrative maintenance. Schiff's base is gold believers; the less Bitcoin falls, the more the term "digital gold" holds up, and he needs a reason to tell his audience: don't rush, this is just a selling point, not that I'm wrong.
To put it plainly, what he fears is never Bitcoin dropping, but Bitcoin not following his script.
Would you rather believe someone who has been bearish for ten years is right this time, or think this is just another narrative being chased by reality?
#Bitcoin #PeterSchiff #BTC #Cryptocurrency #Gold 【Do you also feel that this round of rebound is a bit "hollow"?】
BTC has returned above $64,000, and the second week of August has passed just like that. It bounced back from around the low of 62,300, a nearly 2,000-point recovery, which on the surface looks like the bulls are holding. But if you only look at the price, it's easy to be misled by this market— the real question is not whether BTC can hold above 64,000, but who is buying and who is not.
Last week, the three major US stock indices all hit record highs, with the S&P 500 reaching 7,816 intraday. But if we look closely at ETF capital flows, we find a divergence: from Monday to Wednesday last week, US spot Bitcoin ETFs had a combined net outflow of $389.7 million. BlackRock's IBIT even recorded zero inflows for two consecutive days. The market is rising, but institutions are not buying along. What does this volume-price divergence mean? It means the current price recovery is more driven by short covering and retail sentiment rather than large-scale new capital inflows.
Why is this happening?
The core answer lies in the Middle East. The Strait of Hormuz is effectively blockaded, with the commander of Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps publicly stating that the US is no longer allowed to enter the Persian Gulf, the Gulf of Oman, and the Strait of Hormuz. After the attack on an Abu Dhabi National Oil Company tanker last week, Brent crude broke through the $90 mark, closing at $90.87, and WTI surpassed $86. Geopolitical risk premiums continue to expand.
If you watch BTC's candlesticks daily, you might think BTC is moving on its own; but if you zoom out, you'll see that what really drives the market is every jump in oil prices.
Another signal worth noting: on August 20, the White House will hold a crypto executive meeting. Trump will attend, and the CFTC chairman and SEC chairman have confirmed their participation. This is the first crypto industry meeting at the White House level since Trump took office. Market expectations focus on two directions: clarification of regulatory frameworks and stablecoin legislation. If the meeting delivers substantial positive news, BTC could see a real breakout window. But managing expectations is a double-edged sword—the hype before the news has already priced in much of it, and if the meeting only results in verbal commitments, it could instead become a catalyst for a sell-the-news reaction.
Currently, the 63,500-64,000 range is a support zone, with 65,000 as a psychological resistance level. AIX's strategy is now in a "waiting for confirmation" state. The 63,000-65,000 range is consolidating with no clear direction; the AI system will not act at this point. It will wait for a break above 65,000 with a pullback confirmation, or a drop below 63,000 followed by a volume surge and a stop-fall signal to trigger trading instructions. Some money shouldn't be made, and some risks shouldn't be taken. Before direction is confirmed, controlling your actions is more important than anything else. 市场出现反弹，并不代表资金已经从 $BTC 大规模流向山寨币。真正值得观察的，是 $ETH 能否在接下来跑赢 $BTC，同时伴随成交量明显放大。 目前 $BTC 约为 $64.5K，$ETH 回到 $1.91K 附近。近期数据显示，ETH 相对 BTC 的表现正在改善，ETH/BTC 一度触及 0.0296，创近期较强水平。与此同时，ETH 现货 ETF 近期保持连续资金流入，7 月 ETH ETF 吸引的资金甚至超过 BTC ETF。 所以，别只盯着 ETH/USD。 🔥 ETH/BTC + 成交量 + ETF资金流，可能才是判断下一阶段资金轮动的关键组合。 如果 ETH/BTC 持续走强，并且 ETH 成交量同步放大，这可能意味着市场正在从“BTC 主导”逐步转向“大盘山寨轮动”。 现在还不是盲目追涨的时候——先看资金流向，再看价格突破。 👀📊 #ETH #BTC #Crypto #Ethereum #CapitalRotation