Orbit Post Sitemap
🚨 WALL STREET SHORT SQUEEZE SPILLS INTO CRYPTO 📈🔥
U.S. equities just delivered a powerful risk-on signal, and crypto quickly picked up the momentum.
Softer PPI and jobless-claims data strengthened expectations for easier Fed policy, pushing Treasury yields lower and forcing crowded shorts in heavily positioned tech and storage names to cover.
Then the liquidity rotation reached crypto.
🟠 $BTC stabilized as selling pressure eased.
🔵 $ETH showed stronger resilience, helped by renewed attention around institutional and ETF demand.
Meanwhile, stock-linked tokens such as $xSNDK and $xSPCX surged as traders chased the renewed connection between traditional equities and on-chain markets.
But there's an important distinction:
🔥 Major assets are attracting broader liquidity.
🎰 Small-cap memes are still seeing mostly speculative bursts.
That means the move shouldn't automatically be interpreted as a full-blown altcoin rotation.
The bigger signal is the macro transmission:
Softer data → lower yields → weaker rate pressure → short covering → stronger risk appetite → crypto support.
👀 The next test is whether this momentum survives after the initial short squeeze fades.
If yields remain contained and spot demand follows the derivatives move, today's rebound could develop into something larger.
If not, the market could simply give back the squeeze.
Don't chase the first candle. Watch the liquidity behind it.
$BTC $ETH $OKB $SOL
#CPIPPIEaseFedSplit #AIInfraEarningsWatch On the daily (1D) chart, xMU experienced a sharp dip down to the $XMU 723.69 support level at the start of August 2026. Since that low, the stock has staged an aggressive comeback. Moving averages (MA5, MA10, and MA20) are starting to cross upward, and the latest large green candles show strong buying pressure driving the price toward the $XMU 978 resistance zone.
Historical Context: Old Ups and Downs
Looking at historical market movements helps put this setup into perspective:
Previous Highs: Earlier in the cycle, xMU pushed past local peaks near the $1,012.83 mark before facing heavy profit-taking.
The Recent Dips: Market corrections have repeatedly tested investor patience, pulling the asset down sharply from its major highs during broader sector pullbacks.
Historical Recovery: Past cycles show that whenever xMU builds momentum after hitting a deep bottom (like the recent $723 level), it tends to rally hard toward psychological resistance barriers.After $SNDK and $MU both had a rally, will the next round of AI money start looking at $AMD?
The AI hardware sector has been quite interesting lately. Initially, the market was most excited about $NVDA, but then it became clear that GPUs aren't the only bottleneck. Capital began to spread into HBM, DRAM, and SSD, and both $MU and $SNDK benefited from this revaluation. After storage has been fully discussed by the market, I’ve started to look at $AMD again because its current position is somewhat awkward: AI demand is so strong, the biggest winner is $NVDA; storage shortages give $MU and $SNDK their own logic; $AMD clearly also stands at the core of AI computing power, yet it always has to answer one question—when will it truly be able to take a big enough piece of the pie from $NVDA?
This question is actually different from whether $AMD has good chips. The hardest part of AI chip competition now is no longer just benchmark scores. What makes $NVDA truly formidable is CUDA, the developer ecosystem, the complete hardware and software stack, and the established usage habits of customers. For companies like Google, Microsoft, and Meta, which spend hundreds of billions annually on AI infrastructure, switching chips isn’t as simple as swapping a graphics card; the software, model optimization, and engineering systems all have to move along. So even if $AMD’s products catch up quickly, it doesn’t mean customers will immediately migrate on a large scale.
But conversely, the stronger $NVDA gets, the more justified $AMD’s existence becomes.
No cloud provider wants to have only one supplier forever. The more extreme $NVDA’s GPU prices, supply, and gross margins become, the stronger the motivation for big clients like Google, Microsoft, and Meta to find a second supplier or even develop their own chips. What $AMD really needs isn’t necessarily to "beat $NVDA"; as long as it can consistently secure a portion of the AI accelerator market, that could be very significant given its current scale.
That’s why I think $AMD’s next competition focus shouldn’t just be on next-generation chip specs. What really matters is the customers. Can the MI series continue to secure large cloud vendor orders? Can the software ecosystem keep lowering migration costs? And after the new generation products come out, will customers just test them or be willing to deploy them at scale? Both types of orders are called "AI demand," but their implications for profit are completely different.
The recent market performance of $MU and $SNDK also serves as a wake-up call for $AMD. The AI industry chain has now entered the "proof of profit" stage. In the past two years, as long as a company was related to AI, the market was willing to give the benefit of the doubt; now $NVDA has raised the bar so high that everyone demands actual orders, revenue, and profit to be realized. If $AMD keeps only talking about "next-generation products being stronger," the market will eventually lose patience.
So when I look at $AMD now, I don’t expect it to suddenly take down $NVDA. That kind of story sounds exciting but has little practical significance.
What I want to see is a simple change: when Google, Microsoft, and Meta announce continued growth in AI capital expenditure, the market should not only calculate how much $NVDA can take but also seriously consider how much $AMD can get.
The AI computing power market is big enough that the second place doesn’t need to be first to make a lot of money.
What $AMD really needs to prove has never been "Can I become the next $NVDA?" but rather, with such a huge AI pie on the table, does it have the ability to consistently carve out its own slice.
#AMD #NVDA #MU #SNDK #GOOGL #META #AI #Semiconductors #USStocks #OKXPlanet Will the Federal Reserve raise interest rates again in September? July CPI met expectations, how do event contracts price the probability of a rate hike?
On August 12, 2026, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics released the July Consumer Price Index (CPI) data. Seasonally adjusted, the U.S. CPI rose 0.1% month-over-month in July, compared to a 0.4% decline in June; the overall CPI increased 3.4% year-over-year for the 12 months, slightly down from 3.5% in June. Excluding food and energy, the core CPI rose 0.2% month-over-month in July, unchanged from June; the core CPI increased 2.5% year-over-year, below the previous 2.6%. Both overall and core data met market expectations, indicating inflation continues to cool moderately. By component, the housing index rose 0.1% month-over-month, contributing two-thirds of the monthly CPI increase. The energy index fell 1.5% month-over-month, significantly less than June's 5.7% decline. Food prices rose 0.1% month-over-month. Within core CPI, there was divergence—healthcare, airfares, communications, education, entertainment, and used car prices rose month-over-month, while motor vehicle insurance continued to decline. The core message from the July CPI report is that inflation is slowly improving but has not yet formed a definitive trend that would allow the Federal Reserve to fully relax vigilance. After the data release, "New Fed News Agency" reporter Nick Timiraos wrote that the July inflation report somewhat eased pressure for a September rate hike, but the latest data did not provide much clear guidance on the longer-term rate outlook. This means that an inflation report meeting expectations did not end the suspense over the September rate decision—it only slightly tilted the decision scale from "rate hike" toward "wait and see."
How inflation readings transmit to rate hike probabilities
Before the data release, CME FedWatch showed about a 50% probability of a 25 basis point rate hike in September. After the data release, the interest rate swap market's expectation for a September hike dropped from about 50% to less than 40%. As of August 13, CME data showed a 59.9% probability that the Fed would keep rates unchanged in September, with a 40.1% chance of a 25 basis point hike. The transmission chain between inflation data and rate hike probability is straightforward: the core CPI year-over-year at 2.5% remains above the Fed's 2% target but is moving in the right direction and at a moderate pace. Goldman Sachs Chief Economist Jan Hatzius clearly stated before the data release that he did not expect the Fed to hike rates in the second half of 2026, believing inflation cooling would outweigh the impact of a stagnant labor market. Meanwhile, JPMorgan Chief U.S. Economist Michael Feroli believed the 0.22% month-over-month core CPI increase "may not be strong enough to prompt a Fed hike at the September meeting," but consecutive readings near 0.3% could change the situation. The July core CPI month-over-month increase of 0.2% falls exactly in the "not strong enough" range. However, the market has not completely abandoned rate hike bets—the 40.1% implied probability means a significant amount of capital is still preparing for a September hike.
How a weakening labor market shifts the policy balance
Before the July CPI data, the U.S. Department of Labor released the July nonfarm payroll report on August 7, casting a shadow over rate hike expectations. The data showed a surprising decrease of 23,000 nonfarm jobs in July, far below the market expectation of an 83,000 increase. Employment data for the previous two months was revised down by a total of 103,000. By industry, job losses were mainly concentrated in local government education (-50,000), retail trade (-19,000), and financial activities (-14,000). The unexpected weakening in employment combined with moderate inflation cooling creates a compounded effect on policy. CMB International noted in a report that U.S. July nonfarm job additions weakened significantly and were well below expectations, with a clear slowdown in employment trends and further deceleration in wage growth. Against this backdrop, the "threshold" for Fed rate hikes has been substantially raised—even if inflation remains above target, if the labor market weakens simultaneously, the cost of unilateral rate hikes will increase significantly. Neil Dutta, head of economic research at Renaissance Macro Research, expressed a more direct view: since inflation data does not provide a clear conclusion, the September meeting outcome is roughly a 50-50 split. This "fifty-fifty" pattern precisely indicates the market is digesting two opposing forces simultaneously—the pressure of inflation still above target and the constraints of a weakening labor market.
Why internal Fed divisions continue to widen in July
The FOMC meeting maintained rates unchanged with a 9-3 vote, with three voting members advocating an immediate rate hike. This is the first time since 2016 that three voting members held the same dissenting position. Cleveland Fed President Mester said this week that a 25 basis point hike "may not do much good for the economy," and the Fed may need a series of such adjustments. Meanwhile, San Francisco Fed President Daly, who supports keeping rates steady, questioned whether gradual rate hikes are truly effective. Fed Chair Wash, who took office as the 17th chair on May 22, reiterated the 2% inflation target at the post-July meeting press conference but remained vague on the specific policy path. The June FOMC dot plot showed the median federal funds rate at the end of 2026 was revised up from 3.4% in March to 3.8%, with as many as nine voting members expecting one or more hikes this year. This internal division means the September rate decision will heavily depend on a series of data releases in August. Before the September 15-16 meeting, the Fed will receive the August employment report, August CPI, and August PPI. Any data exceeding expectations could become a key variable changing the voting pattern.
How event contract markets price the September rate decision
Beyond traditional interest rate futures markets, prediction markets and event contracts offer another window into market expectations. Gate event contracts are designed around major macro events as binary outcomes—probability bets on "yes" or "no." For example, regarding the Fed rate decision, users can choose trading directions based on their judgment of policy outcomes. $BTC AI market hype has reached this point, and the company most easily overlooked might actually be Google.
In recent times, when funds talk about AI, the first reaction is still NVDA. Looking for the second tier, you see AMD; spreading further into hardware are MU and SNDK; if you want to bet on AI applications, you look at Microsoft and Meta. $GOOGL is a bit awkward. It is clearly one of the earliest tech giants to bet on AI, with Gemini, TPU, cloud computing, and search all directly related to AI, but the market has a persistent question about it: the stronger AI gets, will Google’s original search business be cannibalized by itself?
This is actually Google's most interesting contradiction right now.
When Microsoft does AI, the market easily understands it as adding new revenue to Office and Azure; Meta doing AI can improve ad efficiency; NVDA is simpler—anyone doing AI has to buy their cards first. Google is different; its most profitable product has always been search advertising. If users no longer click on ten blue links but directly ask Gemini for answers, the experience is obviously better, but what happens to the ads originally embedded in search results?
So Google must accomplish a rather difficult task: on one hand, proactively change its most profitable product, and on the other, prove that the new AI search can be even more profitable than before.
But on the flip side, I think the market might be underestimating the cards Google holds. It’s not a startup suddenly rushing to build large models. Search entry points, YouTube, Android, Chrome, Google Cloud, plus Gemini and years of TPU development mean Google has models, computing power, and billions of users directly reachable. Many AI companies’ biggest headache is where to find users after building models; Google’s problem is the exact opposite—users are already in its hands.
This logic is completely different from NVDA, AMD, and even MU. Hardware companies earn money from AI infrastructure; Google truly wants to earn money from AI usage. The former is already very clear: data center expansion drives sales of GPUs, HBM, SSDs; the latter is just beginning real commercial competition. If AI Agents, AI search, and personal assistants truly become new internet entry points, then companies with user entry points might be just as valuable as those selling chips.
Of course, Google’s biggest risk lies here. The better Gemini performs, the fewer users click traditional search results, so it needs to quickly find new advertising and subscription models. OpenAI, Meta, and Microsoft won’t give up this entry point for free. Google’s previous comfort was that users basically always opened Google first when looking for something; in the AI era, the real competition is who users ask first when they have a question.
So now when I look at $GOOGL, I’m not too concerned whether Gemini can top the next model leaderboard.
What I want to see more is this: as AI search usage grows, can Google still make each user generate as much or even more revenue than before?
NVDA sells the shovels for the AI era; $MU and $SNDK sell AI’s memory.
Google is betting on something bigger—it’s betting that the AI era’s entry point will ultimately be itself.
If this bet wins, AI won’t be the gravedigger of Google Search; instead, it might be the start of Google’s next growth phase.
#GOOGL #Google #NVDA #AMD #MU #SNDK #Gemini #AI #USStocks #OKXPlanet1. Key Macro Drivers Softening Economic Data: Initial jobless claims reached 209,000 alongside a moderate 0.2% monthly increase in core PPI, signaling a cooling labor market and easing inflationary pressures. Rate Cut Expectations: Yields on U.S. Treasuries pulled back sharply as market participants priced in monetary policy easing by the Federal Reserve before year-end. Aggressive Short Unwinding: Heavy institutional short positioning across technology and semiconductor names was caught off guaThe real story behind $OKB breaking above the 100 level isn’t simply hype—it’s a potential valuation reset driven by three major narratives.
The recent strength in $OKB appears tied to growing confidence in the OKX ecosystem and its expansion into tokenized assets and RWA.
Unlike many altcoins that are simply following $BTC and $ETH, $OKB is being driven by its own ecosystem narrative. That makes blindly shorting it a risky strategy, especially after such strong momentum.
A short-term pullback is always possible, but the bigger question is whether the underlying fundamentals can support continued growth.
For longer-term investors, some may prefer spot exposure and a multi-year outlook rather than excessive leverage.
1️⃣ Institutional & RWA Narrative
There have been reports and speculation around major traditional financial institutions becoming involved with OKX and its broader ecosystem.
If tokenized stocks and real-world assets continue moving on-chain, exchanges with strong infrastructure and regulatory positioning could benefit significantly.
2️⃣ Major Supply Reduction
The planned reduction of $OKB ’s total supply to a fixed 21 million tokens dramatically changes its scarcity narrative.
A hard supply cap gives $OKB a fundamentally different profile from an exchange token with an expanding or flexible supply.
3️⃣ X Layer Utility
$OKB ’s role within the X Layer ecosystem adds another layer of utility.
As network activity grows, demand for the token as a Gas asset could increase alongside ecosystem usage. More activity combined with token-burning mechanisms could create additional deflationary pressure.
🔥 The Bigger Picture
The narrative is evolving from:
“Exchange platform token” → “Scarce ecosystem asset with on-chain utility.”
If scarcity, real network demand, and broader RWA adoption continue to strengthen at the same time, the market may assign $OKB a very different valuation.
The key question now isn’t simply whether $OKB can break above 100.
$BTC $ETH $OKB
#CPIPPIEaseFedSplit #AIInfraEarningsWatch One coin fades, another one takes its place. 🔄
The crypto market really does feel like a spring breeze bringing everything back to life. 🌱 Altcoins keep rotating and pumping, as if liquidity is constantly searching for the next target.
$ACU has only doubled so far. I wouldn’t rush to short it here. With its relatively small market cap, even a modest wave of buying could trigger another explosive move. Keep it on watch. 👀
Just look at what happened with $BICO , $APR , and $CAP a few days ago.
They all experienced massive one-day moves, but in hindsight, that surge may have only marked the beginning rather than the end.
The real question isn’t which coin pumped today.
It’s which coin is next to attract the liquidity. 💧📈
#CPIPPIEaseFedSplit #AIInfraEarningsWatch $APR price is rising, but the funds are not keeping up.
This is not such a good signal.
In the past half hour, APR has risen nearly 5% again, but the OI indicator is trending downward, which to some extent indicates that funds are not flowing in but rather flowing out.
This is an unhealthy upward signal, often leading to a rapid decline at the end of the market.
Additionally, its trading volume is gradually decreasing, reflecting that the market is gradually returning to calm and no longer chasing it.
When the heat was high, there was no opportunity to break new highs again.
After the heat fades, the shorts have already been largely liquidated.
And the longs have already taken profits and probably won’t enter the market easily again.
Even "Green Hair" opened many long positions here and made a few thousand U.
There are many who made ten to twenty times their money and exited.
More people making money means the main force earns less.
This is the consequence of the main force dragging the price slowly.
It’s leverage funds pushing the price, but without a quick decisive move, it’s easy to end up as the bag holder.
If short-selling institutions target it during the process, then there will be a show to watch.
Stop using those tricks to lure longs and shorts.
Like the story of the boy who cried wolf, after many times, no one believes it anymore.
Like me, I’d rather write an article and comment than enter the market.
Because I feel this main force is a bit greedy, wanting to take from both longs and shorts.
So, there’s no need to enter the market and become their fodder, it’s that simple.
#CPI与PPI同步降温，加息分歧扩大 #财报观察员：AI基建财报接力登场 #马斯克称AI将占SpaceX价值99% $BTC #Strategy sold another 1690 BTC, corporate treasury shows divergence. At this position, short-term holders above are pressured by a cost of 68,700, while the median realized price below is supported at 63,000. Spot trading volume has directly hit the lowest since 2019. The market is as quiet as the sea before a storm... Glassnode says this is the late-stage bear market compression phase, but the real demand signal hasn't appeared yet. Core inflation fell back to 2.5% in July, the stock market hit new highs, yet Bitcoin remains motionless. Is this normal? In one hour, the entire network liquidated 48 million in crypto, with long positions liquidated at 45.7 million and short positions only 2.3 million, longs accounting for nearly 95.2%, a pure one-sided deleveraging.
Regarding exchange distribution, three leading platforms absorbed over 80% of the liquidations.
This drop instantly pierced through the first dense liquidation zone near 63,300, briefly bottoming around 62,720, with the largest one-hour $BTC BTC drawdown about 1.3%.
First, let's look at the contract pre-data: previously, BTC was stuck in a narrow range of 63,000-65,000 for a week, with volatility continuously suppressed to low levels. The perpetual funding rate remained slightly positive at 0.015%-0.025%, indicating retail traders were persistently opening long positions, but the enthusiasm was not frenzied. The overall long-to-short account ratio on the three major exchanges was close to 1.7:1, with a long-to-short position ratio of 1.54. Many short-term positions were betting on a breakout above 65,000, with stop losses clustered tightly between 62,900-63,400, showing high positional overlap.
The liquidation heatmap marked in advance: breaking below 63,350 USD triggered 442 million nominal long exposure entering the forced liquidation zone; the next major liquidation zone is between 62,000-62,800, totaling about 516 million long risk positions. This 48 million liquidation in one hour was only the first wave released, far from triggering all potential liquidation positions below.
Scale comparison: 50 million in one hour is a moderate intensity short-term stampede. In extreme markets, one-hour liquidations generally exceed 200-300 million, and 24-hour large liquidations can reach billions. This event is a leverage pressure release after a long sideways range and heavily skewed positions, not a systemic crash.
After the liquidation, the network's open interest contracts briefly dropped about 1.7%, meaning some leveraged funds exited directly, but the overall open interest remains at a relatively high level, so deleveraging is not complete.
Macro supporting data: The US 10-year Treasury yield slightly rose, the market continued to lower expectations for rate cuts this year, and the timing of the first rate cut was pushed back. The US BTC spot ETF did not see large outflows but only small inflows of around ten million for several consecutive days, showing marginal buying power is weak and insufficient funds to support the 63,000 level. Meanwhile, the US Nasdaq weakened slightly, risk asset sentiment contracted overall, and BTC showed strong correlation with growth stocks, bearing selling pressure first.
Market details: The initial drop was triggered by several spot sell orders of tens of millions breaking 63,380, not contract liquidations actively starting the move. After the price broke support, exchange forced liquidation systems automatically sold at market price, liquidity was insufficient in the short window, further sell orders pushed the price down, triggering second and third waves of long liquidations, creating a self-reinforcing cycle. Many long positions had leverage concentrated in the 10-20x range, some above 30x, with very narrow tolerance; once support broke slightly, liquidations triggered immediately.
Next key price points data:
Holding above 63,000: short-term liquidation pressure immediately subsides, consolidation continues.
Breaking below 62,800: second wave of long liquidations begins, selling pressure significantly increases.
Breaking below 62,000: large-scale chain liquidation risk opens, volatility will rapidly increase.
Also, distinguish two layers of funds: contract speculative positions exiting en masse, and long-term holders and ETF institutional positions changing are completely different matters. Currently, on-chain long-term holdings show no obvious abnormality, and ETFs have no continuous redemptions; only short-term leveraged sentiment collapsed.
Even if this round of long liquidations clears at once, it does not mean an immediate rebound. Spot trading volume has not increased synchronously, showing no sign of large bottom-fishing capital entering. Whether the market can stabilize depends on spot buying strength, not liquidation data.
The 24-hour cumulative liquidation has reached 146 million, and the gap between long and short liquidation amounts has significantly narrowed, indicating that in the latter half of the decline, shorts also started to be liquidated, basically ending the one-sided stampede phase. $ETH $SOL What MU should be most wary of now may not be that it has risen too much, but that the entire market has already accepted that "memory will only get more expensive."
The logic behind this round of $MU is indeed solid. AI servers continue to expand, HBM has become one of the most important components alongside GPUs, and with each new generation of accelerators from $NVDA and AMD, the demands for memory capacity and bandwidth increase. Meanwhile, the supply of regular DRAM is being squeezed. The entire storage industry, which was still clearing inventory a few years ago, has suddenly reached a stage where everyone is worried about whether there will be enough supply.
This is also why $MU has recently been particularly easy to gain funding recognition.
Previously, Micron's biggest headache was the cycle. DRAM prices rise, profits explode, Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron all expand production; when capacity comes online, prices start to fall again. So in the past, when the market saw MU's profits suddenly improve, the first reaction was often not to give a higher valuation but to ask: is this the peak of the cycle?
AI has temporarily rewritten this problem.
Because HBM is not just ordinary memory with a different name; it requires more wafer capacity and more complex processes. When manufacturers allocate more resources to produce high-margin HBM, the supply of regular DRAM tends to tighten. The result is a very comfortable situation: AI directly drives HBM demand while indirectly supporting traditional memory prices.
A similar thing is happening with SNDK. AI models are getting larger, and data centers need not only GPUs and HBM but also a large amount of enterprise-grade SSDs to store data. So recently, the market has been buying from NVDA all the way to MU and SNDK, essentially betting on the same thing: the speed of AI infrastructure construction will continue to outpace supply chain expansion in the short term.
But what worries me most now is precisely this consensus.
When everyone knows that HBM is in short supply, DRAM prices are rising, and enterprise SSD demand is strong, these factors are no longer surprises. Going forward, for MU to continue to achieve higher valuations, it will need to prove not just that "AI is good," but that demand in 2027 and 2028 can still absorb new capacity.
Samsung will not watch SK Hynix and Micron make money forever, and SNDK will not voluntarily stop expanding production once NAND profits rise. The classic semiconductor industry cycle is like this: expansion starts when supply is tightest, and the most profitable times plant the seeds for the next oversupply.
So when looking at MU now, I consider NVDA and SNDK together.
NVDA tells me whether AI capital expenditure is cooling down, SNDK tells me if storage prosperity is still spreading, and MU's most important factors are HBM supply, DRAM prices, and capacity changes.
If all three continue to rise simultaneously, this storage super cycle could indeed be much longer than in the past.
But if one day NVDA orders remain strong while MU and SNDK start to weaken early, I would be very cautious.
Because the best time to sell cyclical stocks is often not when bad news is everywhere.
It's when everyone already believes the good times will last for many more years.
$MU's biggest positive now is that AI has changed storage demand; its biggest risk is that the market has already started to believe AI has completely changed the storage cycle.
#MU #SNDK #NVDA #AMD #美光 #AI #HBM #半导体 #美股 #苹果公司市值重回全球首位，超越英伟达 Purely handmade post, not AI
July PPI did not increase month-on-month, and the core only rose by 0.2%. The interest rate benefits are on the table, yet $IWM is only around $303.23, up slightly by about 0.17%, touching 305.05 intraday before pulling back.
No crash, no surge. Small-cap stocks have support, but the chasing money is not aggressive enough.
Currently trying a small long position, entering in batches between $302.8—$303.5, stop loss at $300.8, target $307.5; maximum loss per trade 0.5%, no leverage used. If it falls below $300.8, it indicates that even cooling inflation cannot bring incremental funds to small caps. Data as of 00:19 Beijing time.The U.S. stock market just triggered a massive short squeeze—and crypto followed.
Cooling jobless claims and PPI strengthened rate-cut hopes, sending Treasury yields lower and forcing heavily shorted tech and storage names into aggressive covering.
The move then spilled into crypto:
$BTC and $ETH found support, with ETH showing stronger resilience from ETF flows.
Stock-linked tokens like $XSNDK and $XSPCX moved sharply higher, while small-cap memes mostly saw short-lived speculative pumps.
#CPIPPIEaseFedSplit #AIInfraEarningsWatch The hotter quantum computing gets, the more BTC and ETH need to answer a question the market is reluctant to face.
The Trump administration has updated the U.S. quantum strategy and is promoting the commercialization, deployment, and national security applications of quantum technology;
Such news most easily triggers panic in the crypto community: Will quantum computing crack $BTC and $ETH?
To conclude first, progress in quantum technology does not mean that today's Bitcoin and Ethereum immediately lose their security. To truly threaten mainstream public key cryptosystems, a quantum computer must have sufficient scale, stability, and error correction capabilities. There is still a long way between current development and "cracking wallets tomorrow."
But what the market should really focus on is not whether the danger will happen tomorrow, but whether the network can complete migration before the danger arrives.
BTC's advantage is stable rules and cautious changes, which is also an important reason it has earned long-term trust. But the same characteristic may also mean that major cryptographic upgrades require longer coordination time. Miners, nodes, wallets, exchanges, and holders all need to reach sufficient consensus on the migration plan.
ETH's development and upgrade mechanism is more active, theoretically making it easier to introduce new signature schemes. However, the Ethereum ecosystem has a large number of smart contracts, Layer 2 solutions, cross-chain bridges, and custodial systems, making the migration components more complex.
One has slow coordination speed, the other has high system complexity.
The quantum risk that could truly impact first may not be the blockchain itself, but old addresses that have not moved for years and whose public keys have already been exposed, as well as wallets and infrastructure that have not upgraded in time. If the market begins to believe that the quantum threat is entering a realistic timeline, whether these potential holdings will be stolen or migrated early could affect price expectations.
This is also why the quantum topic is both a risk and potentially a proof of institutional upgrade for BTC.
If the Bitcoin network can complete post-quantum migration before a real threat arrives, it will prove that the so-called "digital gold" is not an unchangeable old code but can update its security layer without breaking monetary rules.
ETH needs to prove that a rapidly iterating ecosystem can complete migration in a unified way without fragmenting a large number of applications and assets.
In the short term, it is easy to create panic by saying "quantum will crack BTC," but truly valuable observation indicators are more specific: whether developers have formed migration plans, whether wallets and custodians have started supporting new signature standards, and whether the network can provide a secure transition path for old addresses.
Quantum computing will not suddenly destroy cryptocurrencies because of one piece of news, but it will gradually force BTC and ETH to answer the same question:
Can a system that claims to preserve wealth for decades proactively prepare for attack methods decades from now?The main takeaway is market resilience, not simply “Bitcoin must be at the bottom.”
Bad news isn't moving BTC: If repeated negative catalysts fail to produce new lows, it suggests sellers may be becoming exhausted.
Institutional adoption could be the bigger story: The argument is that the next major wave may come from traditional wealth-management platforms rather than crypto-native traders.
BTC and ETH may capture institutional flows: Smaller DeFi assets can still benefit, but institutional portfolios generally have greater capacity for the largest, most liquid assets.
The important confirmation is price action: “Bad news doesn't matter” becomes much more meaningful if BTC continues making higher lows and eventually breaks major resistance with strong volume.
Don't treat the $180K/$8K/$500 projections as guaranteed targets: Those are forecasts, not facts. Crypto can remain highly volatile even when the long-term adoption story is positive.
So the strongest signal here is:
If increasingly bearish news produces less and less downside, while demand continues absorbing selling, the market may be transitioning from a seller-controlled phase to an accumulation phase.
But I'd still watch BTC's support levels, ETF flows, volume, and macro liquidity before declaring a confirmed bottom.The Harmony incident: The problem lies more with supply and demand cracks than with price structure. Can this incident fundamentally change ONE's price discovery method? About 4 billion ONE was illegally issued on the Harmony protocol. This accounts for about 26% of the supply before the incident, of which approximately 2.8 billion ONE was transferred to exchanges. The current market challenges go beyond simple selling pressure. There are two key points. First, can the Harmony Foundation freeze the relevant funds? Second, can transaction history be rolled back? These two variables mean that the effective supply of ONE itself can be redefined depending on how the incident is handled afterward. The structural feature of this incident is that it was not a single altcoin event, but a simultaneous shock on both the supply side and the trust side. While typical hacks usually involve the movement of funds to specific addresses, this time there was unlimited issuance at the protocol level. This dilutes the stakes of existing holders and reduces uncertainty about future issuance to the market.The short-term sentiment for SOL is clearly bullish, so don't mistake the hype for market movement yet.
OKX Onchain OS recorded 12 mentions of SOL in one hour at 23:00 on August 13, which is about 0.48 times the 24-hour hourly average. The current sentiment is "clearly bullish."
Here, two things need to be separated: a faster mention rate only indicates increased new discussions; bullish or bearish dominance only reflects text classification, neither equates to actual buy or sell orders. In this round of sources, X accounts for 10 mentions and news for 2. The more concentrated the sources, the easier it is for a single narrative to be amplified.
I will wait for the next snapshot to confirm if the speed and sources continue, then review spot trading volume, funding rates, open interest, and on-chain usage. When the data corroborates each other, this wave of hype is worth a closer look.CPI just landed and PPI poured cold water again, but BTC broke below the middle band — Lao Mo says inflation is cooling down, but the market is trading something else
Brothers, this week's macro data is as dense as the New Year.
First, let's talk about CPI, hitting the target precisely.
On August 12, the US July CPI report was released. Overall CPI year-on-year was 3.4%, lower than June's 3.5%, marking the second consecutive month of decline. Core CPI year-on-year was 2.5%, also slightly down. Month-on-month, July CPI rose 0.1%, unlike June's month-on-month decline. Energy prices fell 1.5% month-on-month, but the drop was much smaller than June's 5.7%. Overall — in line with expectations and moving in a positive direction.
Next, PPI was even gentler than expected.
On August 13, July PPI data was published. Month-on-month was flat at 0.0%, while analysts had expected a 0.2% increase. Year-on-year dropped from 5.5% to 4.7%, also below the expected 4.9%. Core PPI month-on-month rose 0.2%, again below the expected 0.3%. For the second consecutive month, PPI final demand prices did not increase.
Putting the two data sets together, the narrative of cooling inflation is confirmed.
After the data release, the probability of maintaining rates in September rose from 54.1% to 55.9%, while the probability of a rate hike dropped from 45.9% to 44.1%. The market is shifting from a "50-50" stance to "leaning towards no rate hike."
But the market didn't rise; instead, it fell.
BTC latest price 63109, 24h down 0.43%, low 62818, high 63997. On the 4-hour Bollinger Bands, middle band 63567, upper band 64079, lower band 63055. Price 63109 has already broken below the middle band 63567, running close to the lower band 63055 — a weak signal, not strong consolidation. SAR reversal signal at 63654 was broken — short-term trend turned from bullish to bearish. SuperTrend at 63679 also pressing overhead.
MACD fast line -127.6, slow line -54.9, histogram -145.4. Compared to yesterday's chart (fast line 4.4, histogram 75.2), bullish momentum has completely disappeared, bears are taking control. Fast line turning from positive to negative, histogram from positive to negative, a classic trend reversal signal.
Key levels: first resistance above 63500-63700, break targets 64000-64200; first support below 62800-63000, break targets 62500-62600.
Good data but price falls — what is the market trading?
First, the night before CPI, BTC already surged 1200 points, expectations priced in. On August 11, the night before CPI, BTC rose from 63100 to 64400, bulls had already priced in the expected CPI. When data comes out, it's "sell the fact," a classic financial market script.
Second, inflation is still above 3%, far from 2%. Lower rate hike probability doesn't mean rate cuts. No hike in September, but rates likely to stay at 3.5%-3.75%. The market is pricing in "higher for longer," which is not truly bullish for risk assets.
Third, the Fed is still divided internally, no winner.
On August 13, two Fed officials spoke simultaneously with opposing views. Richmond Fed President Barkin supports holding steady; Cleveland Fed President Mester insists on a hike, saying "I think we need to act now."
Hawks say inflation is still above 3%, far from 2%, and delaying action will be more passive later. Doves say employment is loosening, inflation is easing, wait and see. Both sides have data backing them, which is why the September hike probability is stuck at an awkward 44%.
Some operational advice from Lao Mo.
BTC breaking below the middle band and SAR double support means the short-term trend has turned bearish. Don't fight the trend.
For shorts: try light short positions on rebounds at 63500-63700, stop loss above 64000, target 62800-63000, break targets 62500-62600.
For longs: wait for stabilization signals at 62800-63000. If signs like a low-volume doji or long lower shadow appear, consider light long positions with stop loss below 62500, target 63500-63700. More conservative traders should wait — wait for August nonfarm payrolls, Jackson Hole Symposium, and clearer direction before acting.
Lao Mo's final word: Inflation is indeed cooling, but BTC fell instead of rising. The market is telling you it's time to respect the trend — data is data, the market is the market, and between them lies the "expectation" wall.
BTC broke below the middle band, are you bottom fishing or waiting? Let's discuss in the comments.
If you think Lao Mo explained it clearly, please like and follow. When key levels arrive, I'll alert you immediately. #CPI与PPI同步降温，加息分歧扩大 $BTC $ETH $OKB Saying goodbye to double-digit effortless earnings: EigenLayer enters a brutal pain period, what will the commercial closed loop of restaking rely on to land?
Recently, I chatted with a few friends who have been constantly accumulating Liquid Restaking liquidity restaking points, and everyone generally complained about the same phenomenon.
The EigenLayer ecosystem, which once boasted double-digit yields, crazy point distributions, and various AVS token airdrops in succession, has recently seen its overall yield drop steadily to a baseline range of 4% to 7%. Many friends who nested assets with multiple layers of leverage for arbitrage found that after deducting gas fees and capital costs, the actual net returns barely cover the losses.
This once hottest engine of restaking is clearly hitting a harsh wall of commercial reality.
Everyone witnessed the early frenzy, with funds flooding the entire network, pushing EigenLayer’s locked value to an astonishing scale of hundreds of billions. But no matter how high the capital stacks, it cannot hide the core contradiction of supply and demand imbalance. The market has accumulated a massive amount of restaked funds, but the number of Web2 or Web3 real-world projects willing to spend real money to purchase AVS security validation services is pitifully small.
Most of the generous early returns people received were just subsidies from the project teams crazily issuing counterfeit tokens to hype up the project.
Once the project teams in the ecosystem start tightening token emissions, or the secondary liquidity of counterfeit tokens themselves comes under pressure, the yield flywheel supported by false interest immediately stalls. Facing this awkward situation, the official side recently began adjusting strategic direction, attempting to move toward the EigenCloud concept and proposed a new plan to extract AVS protocol revenue for secondary market token buybacks.
This series of moves marks that the restaking track is forced to leave the virtual bloated period of point airdrop hype and enter a sedimentation period seeking a real commercial closed loop.
This is actually a good thing for the entire crypto ecosystem. Decentralized security services cannot forever be built on printing money out of thin air; they ultimately need to find real payers willing to pay for network security, decentralized oracles, and data availability. Only when the restaking network can continuously generate real protocol revenue at fiat currency levels and feed this revenue back to token holders and staking nodes can this track emerge from the Ponzi pain.
Finally, a question for friends: after restaking yields have been significantly squeezed dry, will you still lock your ETH in restaking protocols? Do you think the EigenCloud model can run a real commercial self-sustaining closed loop for restaking?
#BitMine成全球最大ETH质押方 🚀 BNB/USDT Short-Term Prediction 🚀
BNB is currently trading around $BNB 606.90 after pulling back slightly from its recent peak of $BNB 620.60. The overall uptrend remains healthy, with key support holding right near the $600.00 moving average level.
📈 Short-Term Price Targets:
Bullish Target: $625.00 – $635.00 🎯 (If it holds above $600.00 and breaks $615.00)
Key Support Zone: $595.00 – $600.00 🛡️
If buyers hold support above $600.00, expect another bullish move toward $625.00+ soon! 📊💸⚡The most interesting thing about BNB right now is that while everyone is looking for the "next 100x coin," it is quietly earning money from the entire market's activity.
Recently, as Meme coins, new tokens, and on-chain trading have started heating up again, I took another look at $BNB. Many people think platform tokens don't have sexy stories; at least $SOL can talk about performance, payments, and RWA, DOGE has Elon Musk, and Meme coins like PEPE and $GIGGLE need no introduction—once sentiment kicks in, their volatility over a few days can surpass that of platform tokens over several months. But BNB has a very special trait: it doesn't necessarily need to guess which coin will be the ultimate winner. As long as more people keep trading and looking for opportunities on-chain, it has a chance to benefit from the entire process.
This is somewhat like a gold rush. Everyone competes over which mine will yield gold, but the ones who consistently make money are often those selling shovels, running hotels, or collecting tolls. The logic behind BNB is similar. When new projects emerge, people trade; when Meme coins heat up, people move on-chain; when market sentiment returns, Launchpool, new tokens, and various ecosystem activities start attracting users again. Ultimately, which project goes to zero doesn't necessarily directly determine BNB's value. What truly matters is whether these people continue to stay within the whole system.
This is also one of the biggest differences between it and SOL. A large part of SOL's appeal now comes from on-chain activity—Meme coins, DEXs, payments, and stablecoins all generate trading demand for it; BNB adds another layer as a platform entry point. Users might initially come just to buy BTC, then participate in new token events, trade on BNB Chain, and finally use wallets to engage with other on-chain applications. As long as this user path keeps cycling, BNB benefits not just from the dividends of a single sector but from the growth in overall Crypto trading demand.
But the biggest problem for platform tokens lies exactly here.
This model looks stable but heavily depends on the platform itself. If users start migrating en masse, trading volume is taken by other platforms, or the hottest on-chain assets long-term happen on SOL or other ecosystems, BNB's entry advantage will gradually weaken. So when looking at BNB, you can't just look at the coin price or how many addresses BNB Chain has today. What you really need to watch is whether the entire system continues to attract new users and whether those users stay after coming in.
OKB actually faces the same challenge. In the end, platform tokens compete not on whose Token name is louder but on who can keep directing exchange traffic to wallets, chains, payments, new assets, and more financial services. The deeper this is done, the more the platform token resembles a stake certificate for the entire ecosystem; if not done deeply enough, it easily falls back to the old story of "fee discount tokens."
So now when I look at $BNB, I'm less concerned about whether it is the fastest rising asset this round.
SOL can win a round of public chain rallies, DOGE can win a round of Meme rallies, new tokens can even double in a day, but platform tokens truly want to win a different game: as long as everyone keeps playing in this casino, can it keep standing at the door collecting money.
The most attractive chips in a bull market are those that surge, but the ones most easily overlooked are often the sellers of chips.
#BNB #BNBChain #SOL #OKB #DOGE #Crypto #加密货币 #OKX星球话题来啦 Tonight, there's actually just one serious matter in the crypto world.
The SEC is holding a meeting today at 10 AM Eastern Time, which is 10 PM Beijing time tonight, to vote on whether to formally propose Regulation Crypto. Note, it's a proposal, not implementation. The CLARITY bill in Congress didn't pass before recess, so the SEC is taking the lead on regulation drafting. Rumor has it they will provide projects with a roughly $75 million financing channel without full registration, but it won't take effect until next year at the earliest. The narrative is set, but don't assume the rules are finalized.
On the market front, BTC is still hovering around 63,000. Yesterday's rebound was mainly driven by contract position increases; spot buying remains weak. This kind of structure can easily trigger a leverage washout with a single pull. Sideways movement doesn't mean nothing is happening.
Two side notes: The Russian central bank has added BTC, ETH, and USDT to the list of tradable assets, with retail investors limited to 300,000 rubles per year, effective September 1. Also, Coinbase and Block are pushing for AI labs, saying attackers' models are stronger than defenders', and security is struggling to keep up.
And SanDisk, Dizi is making a strong push tonight.ETH forecast for tomorrow morning: Will there be a new upward wave or just the "Buy the rumor, sell the news" trap?
Inflation data (July CPI): CPI shows signs of easing inflationary pressure, but the market has yet to respond with a sustainable upward trend. (The Block)
PPI data: July PPI actually rose 4.7% YoY, lower than the forecasted 4.9% and sharply down from the previous 5.5%. This is a positive signal for inflation expectations, but the market reaction is not very strong.
ETH price movement: ETH is currently fluctuating around $1,880–$1,900, indicating that buying power is not strong enough to create a clear breakout after the inflation data series.
Perspective: With PPI lower than expected, most of the good news may have already been priced in by the market. The notable scenario for tomorrow morning is ETH surging to trigger FOMO and then pulling back, rather than immediately forming a sustainable uptrend.
ETH community, be cautious tomorrow morning!
$ETH Key focus for tomorrow morning's trading: Korean stock SK Hynix $SKHYNIX is expected to surge significantly!
There are two reasons: First, today's US stock SK Hynix ADR showed a clear premium increase, providing upward price traction for the Korean stock; second, a funding rate as high as 0.385% appeared again, indicating that bulls are willing to pay holding costs, and the market's bullish expectations are aligned.
I have already set up a long grid for SK Hynix while shorting the SK Hynix ADR as a hedge, waiting quietly for tomorrow morning's developments.
#芯片股领涨，韩股十日反弹逾22% #海力士推进NAND扩产，存储供给预期上升 The US stock short squeeze has transmitted to the crypto circle, with a lively market but very obvious differentiation.
Many people mistakenly think a new trend rally has arrived. But looking beneath the surface, this rise is essentially a short-term short squeeze driven by macro data, not a fundamental reversal.
Starting from the source: the latest US initial jobless claims and core PPI data weakened, with employment and inflation cooling simultaneously. The market further bets on a Fed rate cut within the year, and US Treasury yields decline.
Previously, many hedge funds heavily shorted the tech and storage sectors, piling up large short positions. When the data came out favorable, funds rushed in to go long, short sellers couldn’t maintain margin and were forced to cover at high prices, triggering a short-squeeze stampede. $MU and $SNDK led the Nasdaq higher, amplified by market maker buying, further expanding gains.
This market chain quickly spread to the crypto space, but capital allocation was extremely uneven, causing a strong sense of market fragmentation.
The hottest online tokens are storage concept mapped tokens xSNDK and xSPCX, which surged consecutively in the short term. The community is full of profit screenshots, the hype quickly fermented, attracting many retail investors to chase the hot trend. These tokens purely ride the US stock thematic sentiment, with maximum speculative attributes, and equally high volatility and risk.
In contrast, the large-cap blue chips, $BTC and ETH, only stabilized with rate cut expectations and did not break out strongly. Institutional funds continue to flow into ETH ETFs, showing clear signs of long-term capital layout. Theoretically, ETH’s price elasticity will be greater than Bitcoin’s going forward.
On the other hand, the vast majority of small-cap coins follow a completely different script: no real business or narrative support, just pulsing with the large-cap rebound. When the market moves slightly, speculative funds take the opportunity to pump and dump, rising fast and crashing harder, with violent back-and-forth oscillations to harvest profits. A very realistic phenomenon in the circle now: institutional funds prefer mainstream layouts, retail investors chase hot altcoins, many blindly rushing in amid the hype, ending up trapped at high prices.
One thing must be clear: this round of gains is a pulse rally caused by short covering, driven by short-term sentiment, not the start of a new bull market. The most important upcoming variable is Powell’s speech at the Jackson Hole Symposium at the end of the month. If the tone turns hawkish and rate cut expectations cool, US stocks and crypto markets could quickly pull back. Current leveraged positions are not low, so the risk of a stampede during a correction cannot be ignored.
Given the current market environment, there is no need to chase the rally or join the hype. A safer approach is to wait for a pullback, then selectively focus on BTC and ETH. Avoid small-cap altcoins and hot concept tokens that have been wildly speculated at high levels, and don’t be misled by short-term explosive sentiment.
This article is only an objective market review and sharing; all content does not constitute any investment advice.Tonight's PPI forecast: Will SNDK continue to break out or will it be another "Buy the rumor, sell the news" trap?
Inflation data (July CPI): Signs of cooling inflation are helping the market maintain positive expectations, while the technology and semiconductor stock groups continue to benefit. (Reuters)
Tonight's PPI forecast: If PPI remains below expectations, inflationary pressure may ease further and support sentiment for the tech sector. However, much of the positive expectations may already be priced in.
SNDK price movement: SNDK is on a strong upward momentum. The stock surged over 15% today after Investor Day, when SanDisk presented a long-term growth outlook and emphasized AI storage demand along with tight NAND supply.
Perspective: Given the strong recent gains, even if tonight's PPI is positive, the likelihood of SNDK sustaining an immediate breakout is not easy. A notable scenario remains a spike on the news → strong profit-taking → retesting support levels. SNDK holders, be cautious with the fire! 🔥
$SNDK What really caught my interest these past two days isn't BTC or ETH, but rather SMIC's latest earnings report.
Their Q2 profit hit $479 million, nearly double market expectations, with revenue surpassing $3 billion, up 36% year-over-year. Even more striking, the market had long worried that China's chip manufacturing would be constrained by equipment, processes, and supply chains. Yet now, AI demand has pushed mature process nodes and domestic capacity utilization to the limit. SMIC's report actually reveals one thing: this AI rally is no longer just a story about high-end GPU companies like NVDA and AMD; even the upstream wafer foundries are starting to genuinely receive orders.
This is quite interesting. In the past, people tended to think of the AI industry chain in a fixed way: GPUs are the most valuable, and the rest are just along for the ride. But now, from $MU and SNDK to SMIC, capital is gradually breaking down that logic. GPUs remain core, of course, but an AI server also requires memory, storage, advanced packaging, power supplies, networking, and further upstream, wafer capacity. As AI capital expenditures continue to rise, the ultimate beneficiaries won't be just one or two companies, but the entire hardware chain.
What’s most worth watching about SMIC now isn’t just the several-fold profit increase this quarter, but that it’s starting to face a problem many hadn’t anticipated before: insufficient capacity. The company is accelerating new production lines, which means demand has shifted from "are there orders?" to "can we deliver?" This situation is somewhat similar to what MU, SK Hynix, and even SNDK experienced recently. The market is no longer just replenishing inventory; AI is tightening the entire hardware supply chain simultaneously.
However, I actually think this is where overheating is most likely. Whenever an industry faces supply shortages, soaring profits, and collective capacity expansion, the market tends to price in several years of good times all at once. After Changxin Memory’s IPO frenzy, SMIC’s profit surge, and MU and $SNDK trading on storage shortages, the whole industry chain is telling the same story: AI demand will continue to explode.
The problem is, capital markets love to trade ahead on the next step.
Capacity is tight today, so everyone expands; but when new capacity actually comes online two years from now, will AI demand still maintain this pace? If yes, this semiconductor boom could last longer than any previous cycle; if not, those companies that look most profitable now will eventually face the cycle again.
So I increasingly feel the AI rally has truly entered its second phase. The first phase was about identifying the most direct beneficiaries, with NVDA being the clearest; the second phase is about identifying bottlenecks, with MU, SNDK, and SMIC being repriced. $BTC
AI’s earliest shortage was GPUs; now it’s the entire supply chain.
When an industry shifts from "insufficient demand" to "insufficient capacity," profits look great, but the wildest capacity expansions often start at this point.
#中芯国际 #SMIC #MU #SNDK #NVDA #AI #半导体 #美股 #星球日报 1064 days of growth, 364 days of decline.
Every cycle has lasted exactly the same:
From the 2015 bottom to the December 2017 peak, 1064 days passed, followed by a 364-day bear market into the December 2018 bottom.
Then another 1064 days to the November 2021 peak, followed by 364 days down to the November 2022 bottom.
Bitcoin set its latest ATH on October 6, 2025 — exactly 1064 days after the November 2022 bottom.
If this pattern remains intact, the end of the bear market and the next bottom#芯片股领涨，韩股十日反弹逾22%
I followed this for a month in July; at that time, some people on the forum were shouting "Give me back my money."
A rebound of about 22% over ten trading days (CNBC cites LSEG at 23%), a technical bull market. On Thursday, the Kospi rose 4.15% to 6,852.31, SK Hynix +7.11%, Samsung +3.72%.
But these two numbers must be viewed together: July saw a 22% drop for the whole month, the worst single month since the financial crisis; even after the rebound, it is still about 24% below the peak at the end of June.
It has only climbed out halfway from the crash.
The most ironic layer: the culprit of the July crash was the forced liquidation of leveraged chip bets, while one reason for this stabilization is the government restricting single-stock leveraged ETFs and retail investors reducing margin balances.
The same thing is fuel when rising, but explosive when falling; once regulated, it becomes a stabilizer.
Where the fragility lies (according to Citibank): Korean retail investors bought $6.7 billion in overseas securities in July, with overseas purchases exceeding domestic ones by the end of the month. Domestic funds are still flowing out.
Catalyst: Samsung and Hynix are expected to announce shareholder return plans soon.
Strategy: If bullish on memory, buy upstream or US targets (Micron), avoid Korean leveraged products—the same logic, but volatility differs by an order of magnitude. Watch DRAM spot prices and capital expenditure announcements; these two move ahead of stock prices.BTC held firm, while the altcoins fell badly. This isn't a broad drop—it's capital rearranging its position. Have you noticed that what really hurt today isn't Bitcoin, but those "star coins" that still tickled you yesterday? When $BEAT surged to 1.35 yesterday, how many people thought it was about to take off? Today, a large bearish candlestick plunged back to 0.96, a 54% amplitude, and those chasing the high overnight returned to square one. This isn't just a simple pullback; it's a classic 'distribution trap'—pushing up the price to deal with all kinds of dissatisfaction. Market sentiment here is not panic, but "selective blindness": everyone focuses only on BTC's stability, while selectively ignoring the stampede happening in the altcoin. My true feeling today is: the market is telling us something very important—the money hasn't left, it's just withdrawing from the counterfeit gambling table back to BTC's safe haven. $BTC Staying unmoved near 63,600 is not weakness, it's momentum. When a mountain is like a river of blood while the market remains rock solid, it often means that the main funds are contracting their front lines, preparing for the next targeted strike. But don't rush to be optimistic; there's a risk that has been overlooked: BTC's stability may also be the calm before the storm. If the 63,000 level is breached, those altcoins still holding on will face a second wave of sell-off, and then the -17% drop won't be an issue. Looking at the strong $HYPE, 57.67, climbed up from 52 in five days, and today it even broke the previous high. But my judgment is: it's strong, but it doesn't represent youRussell 2000 hit 3067, a historic high. The US stock market gained 2.7 trillion in just over a week
$BTC is still playing dead at 64,000
But this is the damn point: money is flowing from large-cap stocks to small-cap stocks. Ash Crypto puts it bluntly — historically, ETH and altcoins follow the Russell
2017, 2021, the script is exactly the same. Russell flies first, altcoins lag behind by 50-100 days
Now Russell has already taken off, altcoins haven’t woken up yet
ISM 55.6 + Russell new high, both 2016 and 2020 kicked off crypto bull markets
US stocks are flying, BTC is playing dead, altcoins haven’t woken up yet. Historically, this kind of divergence ends with Bitcoin breaking through first, then altcoins follow
Don’t wait until after the rise to realize it 🚀#芯片股领涨，韩股十日反弹逾22%
I have to say this separately: This is the trend line I have been following for the entire month of July, and the reversal happened even faster than a crash.
Let's clarify the numbers first (there are slight differences in data sources, all listed together):
Bloomberg: Kospi rose 3.6% on Thursday (intraday up to 4.8%), rebounding about 22% from the July 30 low, over 10 trading days.
CNBC citing LSEG: rebound about 23%.
Investing.com: Kospi up 4.15% to 6,852.31, Samsung up 3.72%, SK Hynix up 7.11%.
Korea Exchange data: opened at 6,773.92, up 194.88 points (2.96%), marking the fourth consecutive trading day of gains.
The technical definition of a bull market is a rise of more than 20% from a recent low — it has achieved that.
But two numbers must be viewed together:
1. KOSPI fell 22% throughout July, the worst monthly drop since the global financial crisis.
2. Even after rebounding 22%, it is still about 24% below the peak at the end of June.
In other words: it has only climbed halfway out of a "historically rare crash."
Three reasons for the rebound:
1. Earnings reports from major global tech companies confirmed continued AI investment. On August 12, CoreWeave and SMCI each rose 19% in the New York market, Micron up about 5%.
2. Mild US inflation data eased concerns about further Federal Reserve rate hikes.
3. Government restrictions on single-stock leveraged ETFs and signs of investors reducing margin balances helped stabilize the market.
I want to emphasize the last point because it is the most ironic part of this whole situation.
The direct cause of the July crash was forced liquidations of leveraged chip bets — triggering trading halts and wiping out billions of dollars in retail investor wealth. At that time, someone wrote on a Korean trading forum: "I want to go back to before I started trading stocks. Give me back my money." The KODEX SK Hynix single-stock leveraged ETF dropped about 70% from its June high.
Now, government restrictions on leveraged ETFs have become one of the reasons the market has stabilized.
The same thing is fuel when rising, explosive when falling, and becomes a stabilizer once regulated.
Two sober voices:
Kang DaeKwun, CEO of Life Asset Management, spoke cautiously, basically saying: the market overshot downward during the unwinding of leveraged positions, and the current rebound is a natural recovery after liquidity stabilized; but without a solid AI narrative and stable US interest rates, the market will struggle to sustain a continuous rise.
Citibank pointed out a divergence: the Korean won appreciated 7.1% against the US dollar in July, the strongest monthly gain since November 2022, while the KOSPI suffered its largest monthly drop since the financial crisis. Moreover, Korean retail investors bought $6.7 billion in overseas securities in July, with overseas asset purchases exceeding domestic Korean stocks and ETFs by month-end.
This means domestic capital is still flowing out, and if AI trading comes under pressure again, KOSPI remains vulnerable.
There is another catalyst on the way: the market expects Samsung and SK Hynix to soon announce shareholder return plans, which has also boosted recent sentiment.
Strategy: KOSPI is still up over 60% year-to-date, a rally largely driven by retail investors. A technical bull market does not mean structural issues are resolved — the fact that two stocks account for about 60% of the index weight remains unchanged.
If you want to participate in this storage rebound, buy upstream or US targets, but avoid Korean leveraged products. The same logic, different vehicles, can result in volatility differing by an order of magnitude. What really should be tracked are DRAM spot prices and capital expenditure announcements from various companies, as those move ahead of stock prices.An interesting detail of the last bear cycle of $BTC
In 2022, along with the fall of BTC, both open interest and volumes gradually decreased. The market was clearing out a large number of positions and leverage.
Now OI remains significantly higher than the levels of previous years — so the market structure is completely different.👏Today's split screen is the story: the S&P 500 broke 7,800 for the first time ever, tech led the charge, and traders trimmed their odds of a September Fed hike after a soft inflation print and a 2%+ drop in oil. Classic "cheap money coming back" setup. Bitcoin should be the biggest beneficiary of that setup. It isn't. $BTC is sitting near $63,500, stuck in the same $62K–$66K box it's been boxed into since the July CPI release — down slightly on the day even as equities rip. Continued ETF outflow"Prediction for ETH in the Next 60 Days"
Thursday, August 13, 2026
Q3 · Issue 99
Aspirin · Cyclical Analysis from a Data Scientist's Perspective
ETH current price is about $1782. In May 2026, it dropped 8.2%, June dropped 22.7%, rebounded 9.6% in July, and has slightly oscillated upward since August. The July rebound partially recovered losses caused by the sharp drop in June but is insufficient to directly conclude that this mid-term correction has ended. Reviewing the 2018 and 2022 bear markets, both experienced a repair rebound after summer lows, followed by several weeks of low volatility consolidation. The truly significant annual lows often appear in a later time window.
1. On Historical Months and Price Resistance Zones
The monthly rhythm of 2018 and 2022 is relevant for ETH: continuous decline in May-June, repair rebound in July, and weakening again with a correction trend in August-September. In 2014, there was no July rebound, and the price continued to decline from June to September. According to Glassnode's historical daily price backtesting, ETH fell 11.4% and 7.8% in August and September 2018 respectively; 16.1% and 4.7% in August and September 2022; and 21.3% and 19.2% in August and September 2014. Although these three historical samples are limited and cannot be rigidly fixed as seasonal laws, they collectively suggest that a July rebound during a mid-term correction does not necessarily establish a bear market bottom.
Using $1782 as a baseline for resistance scenario testing, a 10% retracement corresponds to about $1604; on this basis, a further 8% retracement brings the price to $1476.
Therefore, $1580–$1620 is the first risk observation range, and $1440–$1490 is a deeper resistance observation range. These are only retracement observation references, not price targets, and do not imply the market will necessarily reach these levels.
This summer's rebound strength is relatively weak. In 2018, ETH's maximum rebound from the summer low was nearly 55%, while this time the maximum rebound from the stage low is only 18%. Market heat-related indicators currently stand at about 0.22, significantly lower than the 0.42–0.51 range in the same period of 2022, and closer to the mid-stage level of the 2018 bear market. Low market heat often corresponds to insufficient incremental funds, reduced market volatility, and a lack of capital support for sustained rebounds.
2. On Cycle Days and Bear Market Duration
The main cycle lows of the previous two complete ETH bear markets occurred on day 1442 and day 1435 of the cycle, respectively. Currently, we are at day 1366 of the cycle; sixty days later, it will approach day 1426, entering a 1–2 week time window around historical lows. The time difference between cycle tops and bear market lows in past cycles has an error margin of about 12 days. Time alone cannot determine price but suggests that late September to October is a key window to watch.
Regarding bear market duration in weeks, the previous two complete bear markets lasted 53 and 55 weeks, which correspond to the trading weeks of October 8 and October 22 this cycle; an earlier bear market lasted 60 weeks, corresponding to the week of November 27 this year. The months of bear market lows in these three cycles were January, December, and November, respectively. If the month migration pattern remains relevant, October will be a potential key candidate month. However, the sample size for month migration is small and should only be used as auxiliary evidence.
The 2018 historical lesson is worth noting: after the July rebound ended, there was a long period of sideways oscillation from August to October without a clear direction, and a new round of deep decline only began in November. In 2022, ETH's summer balance market lasted until late August. Therefore, the absence of an immediate breakdown in August only indicates a short-term supply-demand balance and cannot directly confirm that the main bear market bottom has appeared.
3. Three Scenario Predictions for the Next 60 Days
1. An important low forms around October, subjective probability about 50%. The overall weak pattern continues in August-September; if ETH breaks below $1700 and the summer stage low, it will first test the $1580–$1620 observation range; if on-chain indicators simultaneously weaken and reset, the $1440–$1490 range will enter observation. Price decline must be accompanied by simultaneous on-chain indicator reset; a simple short-term rapid drop is insufficient to confirm this scenario.
2. Sideways oscillation continues until November, subjective probability about 30%. Support near $1680 remains effective, and the market maintains narrow oscillation; on-chain indicators such as NUPL and ETH-MVRV Z-Score have not completed the reset characteristic of a bear market bottom. In this case, no new lows in October cannot be directly interpreted as risk removal, and the historical sample weight of a 60-week bear market increases.
3. The summer low has been established, subjective probability about 20%. ETH regains and holds above the July rebound resistance zone, with higher lows after pullbacks; even if the MVRV Z-Score does not drop below zero, the price maintains strong upward momentum. If this condition is met, it indicates that the current market structure differs significantly from the previous three cycles, and the baseline judgment of new lows in September-October must be discarded.
4. Verification Conditions and Judgment Boundaries
Price dimension: focus on observing $1700 and the summer low below; above, focus on the July rebound high and bear market resistance zone.
On-chain dimension: historically, ETH-MVRV Z-Score often falls below zero at bear market bottoms; comprehensive risk indicators such as NUPL, staking outflow ratio, network fees, and realized losses generally approach around 0.1. Currently, none of these signals have all triggered, so the bottom formation cannot yet be confirmed.
The core distinction in the next 60 days is between two market states: whether the current sideways movement is a bottoming process or a brief balance before the last mid-term correction decline. Precisely predicting the bottom on a specific day or pinpointing a lowest price within $1440–$1490 lacks sufficient data support.
My baseline judgment still leans toward a more meaningful low appearing between late September and October, but only if the summer low is effectively broken and accompanied by a collective reset of on-chain indicators will this scenario's credibility significantly increase; conversely, if ETH holds above the July rebound resistance zone, I will directly overturn the original baseline judgment.
$BTC $ETH $OKB #CPI与PPI同步降温，加息分歧扩大 #财报观察员：AI基建财报接力登场 #马斯克称AI将占SpaceX价值99% The U.S. stock market just triggered a massive short squeeze—and crypto followed.
Cooling jobless claims and PPI strengthened rate-cut hopes, sending Treasury yields lower and forcing heavily shorted tech and storage names into aggressive covering.
The move then spilled into crypto:
$BTC and $ETH found support, with ETH showing stronger resilience from ETF flows.
Stock-linked tokens like $xSNDK and $xSPCX moved sharply higher, while small-cap memes mostly saw short-lived speculative pumps. $ZAMA
$ZAMA is gaining traction with +0.92% near $0.04737. Momentum is quietly building, and holding support could unlock another bullish leg.
EP: $0.0458–$0.0473
TP: $0.0495 / $0.0520 / $0.0555
SL: $0.0438[Pharaoh's Market Watch]
Pharaoh straightforwardly says that Goldman Sachs' $2.25 billion spend is worth it because what they bought is not just a fund company, but a ticket to the "Bitcoin that can lay eggs" track.
First, let's look at the deal itself.
Goldman Sachs acquired NEOS Investments for up to $2.25 billion, with the transaction expected to close in Q1 2027. NEOS manages $30 billion across 19 options income ETFs, with the core asset being BTCI, a Bitcoin income ETF with about $1.1 billion in assets that generates premiums by selling call options and distributes an annualized yield of about 27%.
Four months ago, Goldman Sachs applied for a Bitcoin covered call ETF but never launched it. Now, by directly acquiring the leader in this track, they effectively bypass the "follow-the-trend" path and directly compete with BlackRock's BITA. Bloomberg ETF analyst Balchunas said bluntly: "Now it's clear why Goldman Sachs stopped pushing their own ETF; buying this is better than following the trend."
But don't get dazzled by the 27% yield.
BTCI does not hold Bitcoin directly; instead, it holds spot ETPs and sells options to collect rent. It can generate cash flow when Bitcoin is sideways or mildly rising, but its upside is capped during a sharp rally. Over the past year, BTCI's price dropped about 43%, with some dividends coming from principal return. High distribution rate does not equal high returns.
The real highlight of this acquisition is not BTCI itself.
In the past nine months, Goldman Sachs has acquired both Innovator and NEOS, pushing its ETF assets over $130 billion and becoming the world's eighth-largest active ETF manager. One focuses on downside protection, the other on yield enhancement, covering the two main derivative ETF strategies. This shows Goldman Sachs is betting not on Bitcoin's price direction but on Wall Street's structural demand for "monthly cash receipts"—retirement accounts over 55 years old need cash flow, which is a more urgent need than young people chasing quick wealth.
For the Bitcoin ecosystem, this is deeper than just spot ETF approval. Spot ETFs make Bitcoin "tradable," while income ETFs make it "yield-generating." These are two completely different types of capital—speculative capital versus allocation capital. If Goldman Sachs succeeds with this move, more institutions will follow, rewriting the participant structure and volatility characteristics of the crypto market.
Remember, Wall Street is packaging Bitcoin's volatility into wealth management products to sell. This is far more worth pondering than short-term price swings! $BTC $ETH $OKB #高盛收购Neos，加密ETF转向收益竞争 【SharpLink Stakes $200 Million ETH with Lido, Bringing Institutional Adoption Boost to LDO】
Ethereum treasury company SharpLink announced that it will stake $200 million worth of existing ETH through Lido and receive wstETH, with assets custodied by the US federally chartered crypto bank Anchorage Digital.
SharpLink can not only continue to accumulate ETH but also sell, redeem, or use wstETH as DeFi collateral in the future, improving capital efficiency while maintaining liquidity.
For ETH, this means that publicly listed companies are beginning to view staking as a standard corporate treasury strategy. If more companies follow suit, it could increase the ETH staking ratio, reduce the immediate market supply available for sale, and strengthen Ethereum's position as a yield-generating asset.
SharpLink's choice of Lido provides a large enterprise case for its liquidity, security, and institutional suitability. Lido charges a 10% fee on generated staking rewards, part of which is allocated to node operators and part to the DAO treasury.
Currently, $LDO's main use remains governance. Whether protocol revenue can effectively reflect in the token price depends on whether the DAO introduces profit-sharing, buybacks, burns, or other value capture mechanisms. When AI Starts Opening Wallets to Buy Computing Power: The Micro-Settlement Revolution in the Machine Economy Era
A few days ago, while exploring several open-source AI Agent frameworks running automated workflows, I encountered a particularly interesting real-world dilemma.
At that time, the AI Agent tried to call a third-party paid data API and simultaneously rent three seconds of temporary GPU computing power to run large model inference. Calculated by computing power consumption, the actual cost of that interaction was only $0.003. But when the AI tried to settle the payment, the existing traditional Web2 payment channels completely blocked it.
Think about it: current credit cards, bank cards, and Stripe payment interfaces are all designed specifically for human users.
They require users to fill in their names, enter card numbers, receive mobile verification codes, and even go through manual KYC verification. Not to mention, traditional card payment channels charge a fixed fee of two to three cents per transaction plus a 3% commission. For an AI Agent that needs to perform thousands of high-frequency micro-interactions every second, this traditional financial infrastructure is an insurmountable physical barrier.
AI agents don’t need fancy graphical user interfaces, nor can they queue at bank counters to open accounts. What they urgently need is a purely code- and protocol-based millisecond-level micro-settlement network.
This is why recently, technical solutions based on the HTTP 402 protocol and signature-free smart wallets have suddenly become popular. Under the new machine payment paradigm, when an AI Agent initiates a data request, it can directly attach a $0.001 encrypted stablecoin in the code request header. The transaction is instantly confirmed on low-fee chains like Solana or Base, and the recipient’s server receives the on-chain proof, responding within milliseconds and releasing the computing power channel.
People have often complained that besides speculation and transfers, cryptocurrencies have struggled to find truly large-scale physical application scenarios.
That’s because people have habitually focused their attention on human users, trying to compete with the extremely smooth Web2 experience.
But they overlook one fact: the majority of future internet traffic and transaction activities may not be generated by humans at all, but by hundreds of millions of AI Agents running 24/7.
Machine-to-machine (M2M) value exchange involves no emotional bias and requires no complex legal contracts; they only recognize deterministic code and real-time on-chain settlement. This micro-payment blue ocean driven by AI agents may be the most hardcore and irreplaceable foundational landing point for cryptographic technology.
Finally, a question for friends: in the next five years, who do you think will be the first to inject continuous real payment demand into crypto networks — new retail users from Web2, or AI Agents with their own treasuries on-chain?
#交易之声：你的经验值得被听到 Attention! Keep positioning! Stay calm!
This short position 📉
I don't just open shorts randomly when I see a single bearish candle
50 $ETH short positions
Average price 1874.68
Now the price has returned to around 1867
Taking some floating profit first
What really makes me hold on
Is today's cross-market divergence
KOSPI in South Korea surged 3.56%
US tech stocks are also rallying
$SNDK even surged about 15%
According to the familiar script
US stocks rise
Risk appetite warms up
Crypto should take off accordingly
But the reality is not like that
ETH did not follow the rise
Instead, it was pushed down from around 1899 to 1865
Could not even hold above 1880
BEAT in crypto is even worse
24-hour drop exceeds 11%
At least in the short term
Funds clearly prefer chasing US tech stocks and Korean chip stocks
Crypto is hardly getting incremental funds
US stock gains do not mean crypto must rise
When the stock market shows stronger profit-making effects
Crypto tends to lose attention and liquidity
——
The 4-hour price has fallen below MA5, MA10, and MA20
1880 to 1895 is all moving average resistance
If the rebound cannot reclaim this area
The bearish structure remains unchanged
Look first at 1865 below
If broken, then 1840 and 1820
I won't chase shorts at the low points recklessly
Wait for a rebound that fails to surpass 1880 before continuing to position
If volume increases and it stabilizes above 1895
Or even breaks through 1920
This short logic will be invalid
——
$BEAT
Currently priced around $0.93
24-hour drop over 11%
Trading volume exceeds $60 million
The more it rose before, the harsher the sell-off now
If it can't reclaim $1
Short term remains weak
If it breaks below around $0.84
Liquidity could be further drained easily
——
SNDK rose nearly 15% today
It has clearly shown the fund preference
The market is chasing AI storage and semiconductors now
Not lifting all risk assets evenly
The stronger it is
The more it shows crypto is not the main battlefield for funds currently
But I won't chase the high here
The rise is too large
Beware of violent intraday shakeouts
——
OKB is one of the few in crypto going strong against the trend
Price has reclaimed around $102
24-hour gain over 7%
This looks more like an independent rally driven by its own ecosystem
It does not represent the entire crypto market turning strong
If $100 holds, we can keep observing
If it can't break through around $105 for a long time
Chasing high is not cost-effective
——
So the logic of this short is simple
I'm not shorting because US stocks rise
I'm shorting because both US and Korean stocks rise
But crypto remains relatively weak and can't keep up
A truly strong market
Won't have all positives outside
While it keeps falling inside
If 1880 to 1895 can't be reclaimed
I'll keep holding
But 100x leverage is no joke
Even if the direction is right, you must protect the liquidation line
Attention! Keep positioning! Stay calm!
Let this position survive first
Then consider capturing the full move
#CPI与PPI同步降温，加息分歧扩大
#财报观察员：AI基建财报接力登场 If the AI bubble bursts, will BTC become a safe-haven asset, or will it fall along with Nvidia?
AI has become one of the most crowded narratives in the global capital markets. Computing power, data centers, chip, and model companies have absorbed massive funding, and the market has started to debate whether such huge capital investments can yield sufficient returns.
If one day AI trading undergoes a significant correction, how will $BTC behave?
Optimists believe that BTC does not rely on the profits of any AI company, and its supply will not expand due to increased capital expenditure, so it can become a scarce asset outside the tech bubble.
Pessimists argue that BTC is essentially still a high-volatility risk asset. Once AI stocks plunge and trigger deleveraging in the US stock market, funds will prioritize selling the most liquid positions, making it difficult for BTC to remain unaffected.
Both scenarios might happen, just in a different order.
The first phase is usually a liquidity shock.
When the market suddenly panics, investors often sell not the worst assets but the easiest to sell. BTC trades around the clock with ample liquidity, so it is likely to fall alongside tech stocks. The pullback in ETH, SOL, and AI-themed tokens could be even greater because they also face declining risk appetite and forced liquidations.
The second phase is asset repricing.
If the AI correction is merely due to overvaluation and earnings falling short of expectations, while the economy and financial system remain stable, capital might flow back to cash, US Treasuries, and undervalued tech stocks, and BTC may not immediately benefit.
If the AI bubble burst further triggers credit issues, forcing the Federal Reserve to release liquidity, BTC could then re-emerge as a narrative tied to monetary easing, fiscal rescue, and non-sovereign scarce assets.
This logic is very similar to 2020: during a crisis, BTC can first be sold off as a risk asset; after policies start easing, it may become a more resilient asset in liquidity and currency depreciation trades.
Therefore, the conclusion that "AI crash is good for BTC" lacks the process.
What really needs to be observed is whether the AI correction transmits to the credit market, whether the Fed changes its policy, and whether ETFs and long-term holders continue to absorb chips during the downturn.
$ETH and $SOL face even tougher questions: Is the growth of AI Agents, stablecoin payments, and on-chain applications real demand, or just stories amplified by the AI hype?
If real usage continues to grow, price declines might just be valuation resets; if the so-called AI on-chain demand mainly relies on token speculation, the bubble burst will cause both narratives to fade simultaneously.
On the first day of the AI bubble burst, BTC may not be gold; only when the market starts discussing who will rescue liquidity might BTC revert to that scarce asset not controlled by any single company. Terrible! Miners lose money on every coin they mine, Puell Multiple dropped to 0.71
This metric is the ratio of $BTC miners' daily revenue to the average over the past year. Currently, miners' daily income is only 71% of the normal level.
Even worse is the cost — publicly listed mining companies have a cash cost close to $80,000 per BTC mined, while the coin price is only $63,000, losing $19,000 per coin mined. This year, public miners have already sold 28,000 BTC.
But interestingly — miners are not frantically dumping.
MPI dropped below zero, miner reserves only decreased from 41,900 to 41,900 coins. They sold just 22 coins in several months, which is holding back sales, not liquidating.
In 2018 Puell dropped to 0.28, in 2022 to 0.35, and in 2024 to 0.49. Every time it hits a low, a big market rally follows.
ETFs are buying, miners are not selling, supply decreases and demand increases — I've seen this scenario before.
Just hold on 🚀Translating OG sell-off directly as topping out is too simplistic.
Wu says that early Bitcoin holders have realized trading profits at a historic high in this cycle, with ETFs and digital asset treasury company DAT becoming the main capital recipients.
The market divergence lies here: old coins concentrated in profit-taking do bring phased selling pressure to BTC; however, the shift of buyers from exchange retail investors to structural buyers like ETFs and publicly listed company treasuries also indicates a change in the level of capital absorption.
For traders, the key is not to simply label the OG sell-off, but to focus on ETF net inflows and DAT accumulation to see if they can continue to absorb on-chain selling pressure. Once absorption weakens, BTC's pullback will accelerate.
Source: Wu Says
#BTC #Crypto100W Market Analysis | Update on US Crypto Regulatory Landscape: CLARITY Act Delayed, SEC Initiates New Rules
📌Key Points: Senate vote on the CLARITY Act postponed to September 15, significantly reducing market probability; SEC shifts to advancing the Regulation Crypto draft for public comment on August 14, signaling a regulatory pivot.
Main Highlights
1. CLARITY Act Setback: Passed smoothly in the House and committee, but Senate vote delayed; Polymarket's expected approval probability dropped from 82% to 21%, cooling short-term congressional legislative expectations.
2. SEC Alternative Plan: Atkins promotes Regulation Crypto, shifting approach from strict crackdowns to clear rules and exemptions; August 14 only marks the start of public consultation, with formal implementation earliest in 2027, so limited short-term impact.
3. Capital Divergence Logic: Long-term positive for BTC as compliance frameworks gradually clarify; negative for most altcoins, which continue to face classification risks as securities, increasing regulatory uncertainty. Night session analysis: Bitcoin breaks below 63000 — the "iron bottom" of three days was pierced tonight
At 12:30 AM, $BTC BTC dropped sharply from 63341 to 62818 in a single 15-minute candle. The "iron bottom" at 63163, tested for three consecutive days, was broken.
Since 8:30 PM when the PPI data was released, BTC had been calmly oscillating between 63600 and 63900, seemingly set to pass the night steadily under the mild combination of CPI+PPI. But after 11 PM, the trend changed; the price steadily declined from 63911 without any rebound or support, then accelerated its fall around midnight, breaking through 63163 in one candle and hitting a low of 62818. It is now at 62826, just a step away from the 62800 level.
$ETH weakened in sync, sliding from 1895 down to 1863, approaching the August 11 low of 1852. It currently stands at 1863.
Three hours ago, I wrote in the evening analysis: "Strong retail data supports the soft landing narrative, giving BTC the confidence to break upwards; weak data means 63163 likely won't hold." Now, retail data hasn't been released yet, but 63163 has already failed to hold. This indicates the market isn't waiting for tomorrow's data but is pre-pricing the "recession" scenario — after inflation benefits have been fully priced in, funds are rushing ahead to anticipate weaker retail sales.
Structurally, what does breaking 63163 mean? Since the decline starting at 65500 on August 10, the low points have been 63776 → 63405 → 63163, each low being refreshed. Now 62818 is the fourth. Bears haven't stopped; the defensive lines keep moving down. If 62800 doesn't hold, the next stop is 62000, then the early-month 61500 area.
Key levels: BTC's 63163 above has turned from support into resistance; below, 62800 is tonight's low, breaking it points to 62000. For ETH, 1872 above turns into resistance; below, 1863 is tonight's low, 1852 is the August 11 low, breaking it points to 1820.
Tonight's breakdown could be a rehearsal for tomorrow. If retail data is also weak tomorrow night, 62800 will likely be just a temporary stop.
#CPI与PPI同步降温，加息分歧扩大
#财报观察员：AI基建财报接力登场
#马斯克称AI将占SpaceX价值99% The BTCFi sector is currently experiencing a strategic competition between the ultra-fast EVM ecosystem and Bitcoin's native pure security, with the core conflict centered on balancing the trust cost of relay node data synchronization and the efficiency of institutional liquidity release.
The current market capital driving factors are ranked as follows: the absorption efficiency of large funds by institutional custody systems, the application landing speed brought by EVM compatibility, and the decentralization quality of relay node synchronization.
In an upward scenario, if institutional funds prioritize the flexible lock-up period of the EVM all-in-one ecosystem, dual staking mining will continue to release liquidity premiums. In this case, rapidly expanding cross-chain financial applications will attract developers to migrate, thereby enhancing $CORE's premium capability among ecosystem assets.
The key to sustaining the upward scenario lies in the stability of relay data synchronization and the scale of institutional custody assets. Once relay synchronization experiences technical delays or decentralization progress lags, this breakout scenario will fail.
In a downward scenario, if market risk aversion dominates, funds will return to the native minimalist architecture without cross-chain middleware. At this time, due to the complexity of relying on relay nodes to synchronize staking data, valuations will face security discounts and capital outflow pressure.
If the relay mechanism encounters data verification risks or institutional custody implementation is hindered, the market will accelerate toward a more decentralized native conservative route, and funds will withdraw from multifunctional public chains.
The most important variables to observe in the next 7 days are the decentralization progress of relay node synchronization and the scale of new staking deposits under the institutional custody system.
#高盛收购Neos，加密ETF转向收益竞争 #芯片股领涨，韩股十日反弹逾22% #黄金维持高位，韩国央行重返市场 Market Analysis｜Major Hyperliquid Update, Expectations for Tokenized Stock Dividends Heat Up
📌Core: Hyperliquid has completed an underlying technology upgrade, enabling the technical conditions for automatic dividends on tokenized stocks. The market expects that future platform tokenized stocks will support a dividend mechanism, strengthening the on-chain brokerage + RWA narrative.
Key Points
1. The ScaleWei module has been launched this time, solving the challenges of on-chain tokenized stock dividends and stock splits, achieving automatic dividend distribution based on holdings; currently, only the infrastructure is in place, and dividend products have not yet been officially launched.
2. Positive logic: fills the gap in tokenized stock rights, expected to attract allocation funds and boost sentiment in HYPE and the RWA sector.
3. Risk warning: this is an expectation-based positive, with compliance uncertainties; short-term movements are mainly sentiment-driven, beware of a pullback after the positive news is realized. $BTC ETF inflows are massive… so why isn’t Bitcoin moving? 👀 Billions of dollars have flowed into spot Bitcoin ETFs, yet BTC keeps getting trapped in the same sideways range. Here’s the part most retail traders miss: Not every ETF inflow is a bullish bet. Some institutions are buying spot ETFs while simultaneously shorting CME Bitcoin futures through a cash-and-carry arbitrage strategy. So while the spot market shows huge “buying,” the derivatives market can be creating an equally powerful sour