Orbit Post Sitemap
#财报观察员：AMD and SpaceX reports are imminent, Circle is the finale
The 30-year US Treasury yield has surged to a nearly 19-year high, sparking widespread debate across the market: Is this rise peaking and about to fall back, or is it the start of a new upward cycle? Many crypto traders think the bond market is far removed from Bitcoin, but I clearly tell everyone: long-term yields are the gravitational center of global asset pricing and cannot be ignored.
Let's start with the underlying logic: the 30-year yield represents the market's long-term expectations for inflation, fiscal policy, and interest rates over the next decade or more. This rise in yields is not just due to Fed rate hikes; the two main drivers are: the US continuously expanding its fiscal deficit with massive Treasury issuance; and market concerns about persistent long-term inflation, leading to reluctance to buy long-term bonds at low prices.
My core view upfront: there is a short-term chance of a temporary peak and pullback, but do not hastily conclude a major top; whether yields can continue to rise in the medium to long term depends on two key variables.
Scenario one: the current level is a temporary peak
Trigger conditions: subsequent inflation data continues to cool, geopolitical conflicts ease, oil prices fall; the market trades on expectations of an "inflation inflection point," long bond buying returns, and yields turn downward.
What does this mean for the market? Risk-free rates decline, the opportunity cost of holding Bitcoin decreases, capital flows back into risk assets, creating a rebound window for BTC. This kind of market is a liquidity recovery rally, suitable for buying dips within a range.
Scenario two: this is just a new starting point, yields continue to break higher
Trigger conditions: ongoing Middle East conflicts push energy prices up, inflation rebounds repeatedly; US fiscal issuance pressure remains, long bonds continue to be sold off, forming a negative feedback loop of "deficit expansion → yield rise."
This is the bearish environment we need to watch out for. With risk-free yields stably above 5%, capital will prefer stable US Treasuries, continuously withdrawing from volatile crypto assets. Bitcoin's rebound heights will be persistently suppressed, and each rally is prone to profit-taking pressure, making it difficult to sustain a prolonged bull market.
Many retail investors fall into a common trap: focusing only on the Fed's short-term policy.
Short-term rates are dominated by Fed decisions, but 30-year long bonds are more influenced by fiscal supply and long-term inflation expectations. Even if the Fed does not hike rates in the short term, if the market is pessimistic about the long-term outlook, long bond yields can still rise. Do not simply apply old experience to judge the market.AMD's earnings report is very likely to pass the cutoff. Stock prices may not necessarily reward you. SpaceX's revenue may continue to grow strongly. The stock price risks are even greater. AMD
AMD's revenue in the last quarter was $10.253 billion, up 38% year-over-year. GAAP net profit was $1.383 billion, up 95% year-over-year. Adjusted earnings per share were $1.37, up 43% year-over-year. The largest growth comes from data centers. This segment generated $5.775 billion in revenue, a 57% year-on-year increase. This already accounts for more than half of the company's revenue. Client and gaming revenue was $3.605 billion, up 23% year-over-year. Embedded business revenue was $873 million, up 6% year-over-year. This report card looks tough. But if you compare it to the fourth quarter of 2025, the situation becomes more complicated. AMD's total revenue has basically not increased. Adjusted gross margin dropped from 57% to 55%. Adjusted operating profit fell by 11%. Adjusted earnings per share fell by 10%. Data center revenue grew 7% quarter-on-quarter, but operating profit declined. This indicates that the demand is not a problem. There is still pressure to realize profits. AMD is increasing R&D investment and preparing the supply chain for large-scale deliveries of the MI450 and Helios. Money should be spent first, income will come later. The company's financial foundation is sufficient to support this round of expansion. At the end of Q1, AMD held $12.347 billion in cash and short-term investments, with total debt of only $3.224 billion. Free cash flow reached $2.566 billion. You need to keep an eye on itA large amount of $BTC is rapidly being aggregated and flowing out from densely concentrated self-custody addresses, with on-chain transfer rates reaching dozens of times the usual level. Holders are racing against an unknown brute-force attacker.
On-chain data shows that over $116 million in assets have been forcibly transferred within a few days, causing a short-term increase in on-chain congestion fees and potential spot selling pressure.
This anomaly originates from an entropy collapse triggered by a historical firmware vulnerability in Coldcard, where hackers directly computed private keys through brute-force algorithms, rendering the defenses of self-custody devices ineffective.
The setback in self-custody faith is changing market risk preferences, forcing funds to flow back to institutional custody. This, combined with the urgent migration of on-chain assets, is suppressing short-term liquidity.
If the migrated funds quickly settle into multisig or newly generated secure addresses without entering the secondary market for liquidation, the selling pressure alert will be lifted. However, if on-chain transfer rates spike abnormally again, it means this path has failed.
If panic spreads causing holders to directly liquidate assets, short-term spot prices will come under pressure, while a significant increase in institutional custody inflows will signal a slowdown in this trend.
When the fund aggregation actions of hacker addresses completely halt, or security agencies confirm that the vulnerability scanning space has been fully covered, the market’s expectation of panic selling will be disproved.
In the next 7 days, the most critical variables to observe are the fund destinations of the fourth wave of attack addresses and whether the net inflow volume of major custodial institutions shows abnormal peaks.
#ISM创四年新高，美债收益率反跌 #美日确认联合购汇SanDisk Waterfall Countdown
Current Market: Violent Rebound or Dead Cat Bounce?
SanDisk closed at $1288.03 on August 3, with a single-day surge of 6.03%, experiencing a rollercoaster intraday — low at 1121.33, high at 1316.44.
Technical Reality:
· On the daily chart, the price is still tightly suppressed by the 20-day and 50-day moving averages; the bearish pattern remains unbroken.
· The 1288 level is right at the lower edge of the short-term resistance zone of 1360–1410, representing an oversold recovery, not a trend reversal.
· The moving average system shows a bearish alignment; price oscillates around EMA10 but fails to hold firmly.
Smoke Screen from News:
On August 4, SanDisk and SK Hynix jointly released the first standard specification for HBF — this news stimulated the stock rebound, but technical positives ≠ fundamental reversal; HBF commercialization is still far off.
Earnings Bomb Countdown:
Q4 earnings after market close on August 5, with market expectations ridiculously high — EPS $34.67, revenue $8.42 billion. High expectations = low tolerance for error; if results merely "meet expectations" rather than "greatly exceed," the classic "buy the rumor, sell the fact" scenario will play out on schedule.
---
Four Hardcore Reasons to Short
First, valuation has escaped Earth's gravity.
52-week low 40.53, high 2354.39 — a gain of over 5700%. TTM P/E above 42x; in the strong-cycle NAND industry, this is a bubble.
Second, the smell of a cycle top is getting stronger.
Citron called it early this year; the core logic is simple — the market is pricing a strong-cycle NAND company as an AI core asset, which is the biggest mispricing.
Third, Samsung’s knife is already at the throat.
Samsung is aggressively attacking SanDisk’s core territory — the high-end SSD market — with the most advanced chips. Supply-side pressure will only increase over time.
Fourth, the chip concentration is as crowded as a morning rush subway.
Turnover rate has long stayed above 14%, a pure high-level speculative stock — it surges wildly up, and falls even more wildly down.
---
Trading Guide: What to do now?
▶ If you don’t have a short position, don’t chase; wait for the right level:
· Wait for a rebound to the 1300–1320 range (lower edge of short-term resistance zone), observe the 1-hour chart for volume contraction and stagnation signals.
· Once signal confirmed → enter short, stop loss above 1360.
· First target 1180–1200, second target 1120.
· Position size ≤ 10% of total capital, leverage ≤ 3x.
▶ If it breaks below 1250 with volume:
· Lightly add to short, stop loss at 1280, target 1180–1200.
▶ For the 1324.87 short position holding strategy:
· Move stop loss up to 1320 — ensure profit remains even if stopped out.
· Take profit in two batches: first half at 1200–1220, second half fully at 1120.
· Consolidate near 1288 → hold if it doesn’t break 1320.
· Volume breakout and hold above 1320 → reduce position by half to protect profits.
· Break below 1250 → signal end of rebound, add to short, overall stop loss at 1300.
Shorting profits from trends; pullbacks are inevitable holding costs. Don’t let one big bullish candle change your view. High volatility before earnings is a hunting ground, not a playground.
Think it over.
---
#SNDK #SanDiskShort #EarningsCountdown #NANDCycleTop
⚠️ This article is a personal trade review and does not constitute any investment advice. Earnings volatility is intense; leveraged trading carries high risk. Please strictly control position size and execute stop losses.The market was not very emotional today. BTC was lying around $62,700, with a daily change of less than 1%. ETH fluctuated around 1860, just like workers who didn't want to move on Tuesday afternoon—neither rising nor falling, just waiting for the non-farm payroll bell to ring on Friday. Beneath the calm market, there were actually two chilling incidents: first, trust in cold wallets has loosened a bit these past two days. The hardware wallet Coldcard exposed a key generation vulnerability that had been dormant for five years, losing 594 BTC overnight, with an estimated loss of $70 to 80 million across the entire network People have always thought cold wallets were the safest safe, only to discover that the lock cylinder of the safe came with a bug on the day it left the factory. This is a lot like relationships. The person you think is the most reliable is often the one you've never checked. Normally, if something doesn't happen, it becomes a big deal. For those using hardware wallets, remember to check the firmware version tonight. Don't bet all your security on one device. Second, the macro sentiment is hawkish. The Fed held steady last time, but three officials have already voted to raise rates. The probability of a rate hike in September has been pushed up to over 60%, and this week's data is especially dense Wednesday is small nonfarm, Friday is large nonfarm payrolls, expecting an increase of 88,000 and an unemployment rate of 4.2. What do you think about tomorrow? My view is: don't expect a big rally in the next couple of days. The narrow range between 62,000 and 64,000 will likely require further grinding. The real direction depends on Friday's nonfarm payrolls. The data is too hot, and the Fed has an excuse to raise rates; too cold data is feared of a recession. In fact, lukewarm numbers are the most comfortable. In terms of operations,⚠️Several key signals in today's market, highlighting the main points directly.
BTC is oscillating around 62420, with no clear direction yet. The 64000 to 65500 range above is a dense zone for short liquidations; a breakout could trigger a short squeeze. Below, the 62000 to 63000 range faces long liquidation pressure. The forces of bulls and bears are nearly balanced, with direction depending on US-Iran negotiations and macro data. Geopolitical easing is a marginal positive, but the market has partially priced it in. BTC did not follow the sharp rise in US stocks, indicating the crypto market is waiting for a clearer catalyst.
Amazon's market cap surpassed $3 trillion for the first time, with its stock rising about 5%. Palantir's earnings greatly exceeded expectations, surging after hours. Meta, Microsoft, and Google all strengthened. The collective rise in tech stocks shows restored confidence in AI investment returns. However, for the crypto market, the US stock rally was not followed by BTC, and weak ETF fund flows limit upward momentum. A new catalyst is needed in the short term to break the deadlock.
SanDisk, as a core supplier of enterprise-grade SSDs, directly benefits from data center expansion demand. The long position at 1206.65 is still held, with stop loss moved up to 1220, targeting 1300 to 1350.
Next, focus on three things: whether the Strait of Hormuz actually reopens, which will determine oil price trends and inflation expectations; whether Bitcoin ETF fund flows turn positive, which will decide short-term direction; and SanDisk's earnings report on August 5, which will influence sentiment in the storage sector. Think it over. #EarningsWatch: AMD and SpaceX reports are imminent, Circle is the finale #Palantir revenue up 93%, after-hours up 13% #MSTR sells another 1638 bitcoins, halving its holdings $BTC $ETH $SNDK
Personal views for reference only, not investment advice. Fundamental Research Report $FIL / Filecoin (DePIN) $3.20
Conclusion first: Filecoin ($FIL) overall score 49/100, rating Early Stage Project, insufficient validation. Breaking down the three layers, the company team has cash reserves, the protocol network shows paid usage traces, and token capture has been realized.
Project overview: Filecoin (token $FIL), DePIN sector. Leading decentralized storage. Competitors include AR, STORJ. Traditional compute rental giants are AWS, CoreWeave, charging by GPU hour, with A100 monthly rent at $12,000-$25,000, expensive and high barrier. On-chain solutions fragment compute power for bidding, suppliers require no centralized approval, idle GPUs become available supply. Customer unit price $50-$500/month, settlement in USDC or fiat. Narrative-driven sector, usage drops 60-80% in bear markets. Positioned as an end-to-end vertical platform. Product deployment: protocol layer officially running, on-chain dashboard shows protocol fees accumulating, paid usage traces exist. Latest version not found, 60 valid commits in last 90 days.
User side: address MAU not disclosed, DAU not disclosed, 24h trading volume $80.00M, TVL not found. Wallet addresses do not equal natural person monthly active users; large addresses concentrated holdings overestimate real user count. Revenue side: user fees undisclosed, supplier income about 80-90% of user fees (to LPs and nodes), protocol treasury income $2.00M, token holder buyback and burn annualized no burn mechanism. 24h trading volume is business flow, not revenue. Company profit does not equal protocol profit, protocol profit does not equal token holder profit. Code side: 60 valid commits in 90 days, 25 active contributors, latest version not found. GitHub is grade A evidence for direct verification. Investment background: company equity financing checked via PitchBook/Crunchbase (grade A), token private and public sales via whitepaper, release schedule, and on-chain unlock contracts (grade A), market makers and ecosystem grants grade B, not representing long-term VC holdings, technical integration via API/SDK evidence (grade B), strategic partnerships and logo walls grade D. NVIDIA GPU usage does not equal NVIDIA investment, exchange listing does not equal exchange strategic investment.
Token side: total supply 1,300,000,000, circulating 950,000,000 (73.1%), FDV $4.20B, next unlock 2026-Q4 (3.50% of circulating +), no clear annualized buyback and burn. Must buy tokens to use product? Partially yes, medium value capture (staking/discount/governance). Compared with peers (uniform criteria, no cross-sector comparison): circulating market cap Filecoin $3.00B, AR undisclosed, STORJ undisclosed. FDV Filecoin $4.20B, AR undisclosed, STORJ undisclosed. Annual revenue Filecoin $2.00M, AR undisclosed, STORJ undisclosed. Monthly active addresses or users Filecoin undisclosed, AR undisclosed, STORJ undisclosed. Figures based on public data snapshots, some missing data supplemented by official or industry sources. Valuation: circulating market cap $3.00B, FDV $4.20B, P/S 1500.0x, FDV to revenue 2100.0x. Pessimistic scenario $3.00B at 50-70% discount, neutral range oscillation, optimistic scenario revenue doubles, burn implemented, enterprise clients onboard, FDV P/S aligns with top projects.
Overall: insufficient evidence, narrative-driven (score 49/100). Token value capture realized (buyback/burn/Gas). Circulating market cap relatively expensive compared to fundamentals, overextended expectations, FDV moderate. Potential risks: short-term large unlock dump, protocol income long-term zero, token demand relying only on incentives (if incentives stop, usage collapses). Continuous monitoring: weekly protocol fees, burn amount, active address retention, TVL/loan balance, GitHub version releases. Judgments based on public data, not investment advice. Conclusions should be revised if key indicators deviate significantly.
Report ends here, welcome to discuss.
#FundamentalResearch #Crypto #Research #OKXOrbit ETH one-hour heat roughly aligns with the long-window average, slightly bullish dominant: How to interpret 21 samples
ETH popularity should be split into two parts: one is how many people are talking, the other is the tone of the discussion.
OKX Onchain OS recorded 21 mentions of ETH in one hour at 16:00 on August 4 (China time) in the official snapshot, including 16 from X and 5 from news; totaling 524 mentions in 24 hours.
The latest one-hour speed is 0.96 times the 24-hour hourly average, in other words, almost close to the 24-hour hourly average, overall classified as "roughly aligned with the long-window average." This describes attention rhythm but cannot replace price, volume, or capital flow data.
In terms of tone, one hour is 29% bullish, 10% bearish, about 61% neutral, so currently "slightly bullish dominant." The 24-hour corresponding ratio is 34% bullish, 18% bearish; whether the short window is deviating from the long window is more meaningful than looking at one percentage alone.
What I care most about here is actually the denominator: only 21 mentions. A few more concentrated discussions could significantly rewrite the proportions; retweets, quotes, and news restatements might all be about the same event. Bullish or bearish can be reported as is, but should not be casually translated as how much capital has established positions in the same direction.
Currently, ETH's source structure is "mainly X, supplemented by news." If X mentions increase first and news remains low, it looks like the community is spreading first; if news also increases simultaneously, it only means more verifiable material is available, and details still need to be confirmed from original announcements by foundations, protocols, regulators, or exchanges.
The 24-hour source background is 421 mentions from X and 103 from news. Comparing this with the one-hour 16 and 5 mentions shows whether the new round of discussion has switched communication channels. Channel changes themselves are neither bullish nor bearish but affect information speed and verifiability.
For ETH, community signals are best cross-checked with two independent data lines. Network usage can be seen from fees, active addresses, L2 settlements, and staking changes; market structure looks at spot volume, futures basis, funding rates, and options skew. Any of these is closer to real demand than a single sentiment ratio.
The 24-hour average also smooths out spikes caused by announcements and market sessions. If the latest hour is below average, it might just be a quieter time; if above average, it might be a single event intensifying. Only if two to three consecutive snapshots maintain the same direction does it look like a continuation rather than momentary noise.
This set of ratios can easily be rewritten in the next snapshot. If the sample expands and bullish and bearish quickly return close, it means the previous movement was mainly driven by a small amount of text; if tone differences remain and speed continues to rise, with on-chain usage or volume data confirming, confidence has reason to increase.
This round of ETH does not need to be forced into a big conclusion. Discussion roughly aligns with the long-window average, tone is slightly bullish dominant, sources mainly X with news as supplement—just remember these three points. It has not yet proven a breakout, net capital inflow, or on-chain demand change; whether it still holds after the next sample expansion is the real focus.#财报观察员：AMD and SpaceX reports are imminent, Circle is the finale
Damn! Tonight in this lousy earnings season, let's see who among AMD, SpaceX, and Circle will dominate the market first.
Stop fooling people with those overused "AI narrative fulfillment," "Starlink secrets," and "stablecoin anchors"—the market is only watching one thing now: who can smash expectations, that’s the boss; who drops the ball, get ready to be crushed.
Palantir already set the rules yesterday: 93% growth + raised guidance, after-hours jumped 12% straight. Now it’s these three’s turn, don’t expect a copy-paste script, the market no longer buys that soft "meets expectations" nonsense.
On AMD’s side, chip enthusiasts are getting impatient.
Consensus is revenue around 11.3 billion, nearly 50% year-over-year surge. The focus isn’t the number itself, but how well the MI series GPUs ship, whether data centers can keep booming, and if gross margins hold steady.
KOLs on X bluntly say: AMD has risen just over 100% this year, expectations are sky-high, just meeting them isn’t enough. Some say "a slight 3%-8% rise is normal, a real surge requires management to signal a future even stronger than the market expects."
Some even watch big orders like Anthropic’s, thinking as long as AI server orders don’t collapse, there’s hope after hours. Conversely, if data center growth softens, GPU shipments fall short, or guidance is just mediocre, high valuations will be repriced immediately, and profit-taking will be ruthless. Historical data shows mixed first-day post-earnings moves, with average performance weak. Don’t dream of a 20% Nvidia-style surge; at this price, beating expectations is the baseline.
SpaceX is even more thrilling, its first earnings since going public.
Revenue is roughly 6 to 7 billion range, Starlink remains the only profitable backbone, with over 10 million users. The problem is after consolidating xAI, capital expenditure burns fiercely, short-term profitability relies entirely on Starlink.
Worse, on August 6th, a lock-up expiration will release about 900 million shares, which at recent prices means potential selling pressure worth hundreds of billions. Early investors and employees don’t have Musk’s patience locked until 2027.
KOLs on X also expressed views: "Cathie Wood bought 26 million SpaceX shares early, that’s a sell signal." Some mock: SpaceX dodged Wall Street’s quarterly grilling for 20 years, now Musk has to explain GAAP margins, cash burn, and satellite depreciation face-to-face—welcome to the big leagues.
Some analysts note short positions already account for about 32% of tradable float; if earnings don’t provide a clear Starlink profit path and controlled AI spending narrative, the lock-up shares won’t be absorbed, just wait and watch.
Circle is the finale, the real test for the stablecoin sector.
Revenue almost entirely depends on USDC circulation and short-term interest rates. Circulation has recently shown signs of contraction; whether interest rates can compensate depends entirely on the Fed’s mood.
Someone on X hit the nail on the head: "USDC demand exists, but Circle’s profits are tied to the macro yield cycle." Others watch the rollout of the Arc blockchain and payment network, and whether the automatic renewal of the revenue-sharing agreement with Coinbase can reduce reliance on a single channel.
As rate cut expectations heat up, pressure rises immediately; if legislation progresses smoothly and institutional partnerships open more doors, it can hold for a while. The crypto community’s biggest concern is how long the interest rate feast can last.
These three span AI computing power, space connectivity, and crypto payments, essentially testing three things: how strong AI hardware demand really is, whether commercial space can turn from burning cash to making money, and if stablecoins have resilience under dual pressure from compliance and interest rates.
When tech stock sentiment moves, high-beta stuff like BTC will shake along. If AMD shines, the hardware chain and storage squeeze can continue another round; if it crashes, short-term sentiment will be hit, and BTC won’t be immune.
SpaceX’s lock-up itself isn’t related to crypto, but the overall tech stock turmoil will transmit over.
In short, the earnings season logic is this: beat expectations and rise, meet expectations and stay flat, miss expectations and fall.#MSTR sells another 1,638 BTC, scale halved
🔥MSTR sold again, 1,638 coins, but many people didn’t understand a key detail behind the "scale halved"
Brothers, Strategy (formerly MicroStrategy) sold coins again.
From July 27 to August 2 this week, the company sold 1,638 BTC, cashing out about $105 million, with an average selling price of $63,957.
Seeing this number, the first reaction might be: "Oh no, even Seller is starting to cut losses?"
But look closely, this sale differs from previous ones by one key point — the scale was halved.
---
From "massive dumping" to "testing the waters," the strategy is quietly changing
Let's review MSTR’s selling rhythm this year.
In late June, Strategy officially launched the "Digital Credit Capital Framework," and since then, selling activity has clearly increased. But previous rounds started with several thousand coins; this time only 1,638, directly cut in half.
Also note a detail: the average selling price this time was $63,957, while the company’s average holding cost is $75,419.
For each coin sold, there’s nearly a $11,000 loss. This is not profit-taking; it’s a real loss reduction.
But Seller says: this money is used to increase cash reserves to $4 billion, extend funding sustainability by 57 days, and cover preferred stock dividends and stock buybacks.
In plain language: the company is short on cash flow and has to draw from BTC reserves to cover dividends and buybacks.
---
The "never sell" belief is giving way to financial reality
What was MSTR’s core narrative in recent years? "Only buy, never sell," "Bitcoin standard," "long-term holding."
This narrative supported the company’s stock price and market confidence in institutional Bitcoin reserves. But now, "never sell" has become "selective selling," and selling is becoming more frequent.
More intriguingly: the company hasn’t made any new purchases for five weeks.
Previously, MSTR’s logic was "buy more when prices fall," using debt and equity issuance to keep increasing holdings. Now it’s the opposite: no buying on dips, but selling instead. What does this mean? It means the company’s cash flow pressure has reached a point where it must tap core reserves.
Seller even expanded the cash-out target to $5 billion.
What does $5 billion mean? At current prices, that’s roughly selling 70,000 to 80,000 BTC. If this $5 billion target is executed, MSTR’s holding structure will fundamentally change.
---
Market impact: selling pressure is small, but the signal is bad
Objectively, 1,638 BTC out of MSTR’s total 842,000 BTC holdings is only 0.19%. This selling pressure has minimal direct impact on the market, barely a ripple.
But market concerns are not about quantity, but about trend and signal.
MSTR is the world’s largest Bitcoin reserve company, holding 4% of BTC circulation. Every sale sends a signal to the market: even the most steadfast bulls are running short on cash.
A deeper issue is: if MSTR is forced to keep reducing holdings due to cash flow pressure, will other institutions follow suit? After all, the macro environment is unfriendly, the Fed is still hawkish, and corporate financing costs are rising. MSTR is not the only company holding Bitcoin as reserves, but it is the largest. When the leader moves, the entire "corporate Bitcoin reserve" narrative will weaken.
---
My judgment: short-term pressure, but don’t panic excessively
Conclusion first: MSTR’s recent coin sale has limited impact on BTC price but significant impact on market sentiment.
The volume of 1,638 coins can’t even affect intraday volatility. But the combination of "no purchases for five weeks + third sale + cash-out target expanded to $5 billion" means MSTR has shifted from a "net buyer" to a "net seller." This role change is more important than the exact number sold.
On the other hand, MSTR still holds 842,000 BTC, remaining the world’s largest corporate holder. If the $5 billion cash-out target is spread over several years, the annual selling pressure would be only a few thousand coins, negligible compared to total holdings.
Two key points to watch:
1. If BTC continues to fall, MSTR’s unrealized losses will widen, possibly forcing accelerated selling
2. If the company’s stock price remains under pressure, demand for stock buybacks will rise, increasing pressure to sell coins to raise cash
In the short term, the $63,000 level is critical. MSTR’s average selling price is around $64,000, indicating the company has a "liquidity need" at this price. If BTC falls below $60,000, MSTR’s book pressure will rise sharply, and then it won’t just be about 1,638 coins.
---
A few final words
MSTR’s shift from "only buying" to "buying and selling" to "only selling" is part of the market cycle. No company can indefinitely accumulate without regard to cost; when cash flow and stock price are under pressure, core assets become the last ammunition.
For crypto community brothers, MSTR’s selling is not a signal to "immediately liquidate," but definitely a reminder to "not blindly go long." Institutional money isn’t infinite; when even the most steadfast bulls start budgeting carefully, retail investors should be even more cautious about going all in.
The above is purely personal opinion and not investment advice. How long do you think MSTR’s selling will continue? Let’s discuss in the comments.Recently, there has been discussion on X about Coinbase's judgment on the "agent economy." The related public post page on CoinDesk shows about 5 hours and approximately 10,000 views. The real topic worth watching is not whether machines will surpass humans, but whether money can be programmatically used without handing over all the authority at once.
Coinbase has officially developed "Coinbase for Agents" into MCP/CLI: agents can perform payment, research, or trading-related tasks within user-defined boundaries; its research materials also position protocols like x402 as payment tracks between machines and services. This indicates it has moved from concept to tool level, but three things are still missing for a mature "agent economy": verifiable identity of the operator, the ability to set spending limits for each transaction, and the ability to revoke and hold accountable in case of errors or deception.
For ordinary users, the most important thing to keep is the permission list: first distinguish between read-only data, payment, coin swapping, and transfer permissions; default to low limits with confirmation for each transaction, use test wallets separately; do not interpret "can execute automatically" as "should execute automatically." AI hype can drive the topic but cannot replace account security, contract risks, and final confirmation.Several key signals in today's market, highlighting the main points directly.
BTC is oscillating around 62420, with no clear direction yet. The 64000 to 65500 range above is a dense short liquidation zone; a breakout could trigger a short squeeze. Below, the 62000 to 63000 range faces long liquidation pressure. The forces of bulls and bears are nearly balanced, with direction depending on US-Iran negotiations and macro data. Geopolitical easing is a marginal positive, but the market has partially priced it in. BTC did not follow the sharp rise in US stocks, indicating the crypto market is waiting for a clearer catalyst.
Amazon's market cap surpassed $3 trillion for the first time, with its stock rising about 5%. Palantir's earnings greatly exceeded expectations, surging after hours. Meta, Microsoft, and Google all strengthened. The collective rise in tech stocks shows market confidence in AI investment returns is recovering. However, for the crypto market, US stocks rose but BTC did not follow; weak ETF fund flows limit upward momentum. A new catalyst is needed in the short term to break the deadlock.
SanDisk, as a core supplier of enterprise SSDs, directly benefits from data center expansion demand. The long position at 1206.65 is still held, with stop loss moved up to 1220, targeting 1300 to 1350.
Next, focus on three things: whether the Strait of Hormuz actually reopens, which will determine oil price trends and inflation expectations; whether Bitcoin ETF fund flows can turn positive, deciding short-term direction; and SanDisk's earnings report on August 5, which will determine sentiment in the storage sector. Think it over. #EarningsObserver: AMD and SpaceX reports are imminent, Circle is the finale #Palantir revenue up 93%, after-hours up 13% #MSTR sells another 1638 bitcoins, halving the scale $BTC $ETH $SNDKTrump Media, a company under Trump, has once again transferred a large amount of BTC, valued at approximately $165 million. This marks the third large-scale transfer by the company in nearly seven months.
The market's initial reaction was panic. After all, the market believes that Trump is very likely dumping.
Interestingly, a spokesperson for Trump Media urgently clarified that this was a custodial transfer, not a sale. However, many netizens are not naive. On-chain monitoring shows that the company has sold a total of 7,281 BTC over the past seven months, cashing out about $545 million. This means the so-called "custodial transfer" highly overlaps with the ongoing reduction in holdings.
What is even more concerning is the cost basis of their holdings. Trump Media bought 11,542 BTC at an average price of $118,529 between July and August 2025, with a total investment of about $1.368 billion. Based on the current market price, the remaining 4,261 BTC are still at an unrealized loss of about $237 million. The total of realized and unrealized losses amounts to as much as $555 million.
In summary, regardless of the company's explanation, the large-scale transfer itself is creating expectations of a sell-off.
Secondly, DJT's stock price has fallen more than 25% since establishing its BTC reserves, and the company faces liquidation pressure. The remaining 4,261 BTC could become a new selling pressure at any time.
Additionally, ABTC, the Bitcoin mining company under the Trump family, has suffered losses for three consecutive quarters, with its stock price plummeting about 95% from its peak. The entire Trump-related crypto landscape is facing a comprehensive downturn.
Brothers, when the biggest political celebrity is selling at a loss, can the institutional narrative for BTC still hold? Haha. #从降息到加息，联储分歧全公开 [Pharaoh Market Watch]
ISM hits a four-year high, while U.S. Treasury yields fall—Is this script written backwards?
Pharaoh says directly: the stronger the economy, the higher U.S. Treasuries rise, indicating the market is playing a reverse pricing game of "good data = bad news." The ISM Manufacturing PMI surged from 53.3 to 55.6, the highest since May 2022, far exceeding the expected 54, with new orders and employment booming. When the data came out, the market's first reaction was not to buy the dollar but to buy U.S. Treasuries, with the 10-year yield dropping 5 basis points.
Why? Because Trump paused large-scale strikes on Iran, oil prices plunged 5.4%, directly collapsing inflation expectations. With inflation easing, U.S. Treasuries rose. The current script is: geopolitical tensions cool → oil prices fall → inflation cools → U.S. Treasuries rise, while the economy's strength becomes a supporting role.
On the Bitcoin side, easing geopolitical risks have temporarily restored risk appetite, but the ISM data reinforces the Fed's expectation of "maintaining high interest rates for a longer time," which is a long-term drag on risk assets. Short term looks like a rebound; mid term depends on how rate hike expectations evolve.
Follow Pharaoh, and your wealth won't get lost! $BTC $ETH $BICO #ISM创四年新高，美债收益率反跌 On August 5th, Beijing time, stablecoin issuer Circle (CRCL) will release its new quarterly earnings report before the US stock market opened. However, on the eve of this quarter's earnings release, Wall Street has already shown clear divisions regarding Circle's future value. On August 3, Morgan Stanley (hereafter referred to as "Morgan Stanley") downgraded Circle's rating from "Equal Weight" to "Underweight" and sharply lowered its price target from $106 to $38. Meanwhile, TD Cowen covered Circle in its rating for the first time, giving a "Buy" rating and setting a target price of $82. The two institutions offered sharply different ratings, and the core disagreement reflected lies in how to define Circle today—whether it continues to be seen as a stablecoin issuer relying on USDC for scale growth, or as a tech company evolving into a digital financial infrastructure platform. Institutional Divergence: Morgan Stanley bears USDC growth, TD Cowen bets on platform-based transformation. Morgan Stanley analyst James Faucette gave a "Underweight" rating. On TipRanks, Faucette received a four-star rating (out of five stars), and is widely regarded as a sell-side analyst far above average, despite Faucett having been above average over the past two years我先给结论：xPLTR这轮并非没有事实支撑的情绪拉升，Palantir的财报确实给了重估理由；但价格跑得比成交确认更快，现在最值得看的不是还能冲多高，而是美股现金盘能否接住这次预期上修。 先把时间和数据摆清楚。Palantir在北京时间8月4日04:05公布第二季度结果，略早于本轮12小时选题边界，因此我把它当作背景，不冒充窗口内新闻。真正属于05:02—17:02窗口的新事实是：OKX一分钟数据中，xPLTR从141.25升到146.20，继续上涨3.50%，区间低点138.77、高点146.20；若把两个等长窗口合并，24小时涨幅约15.88%。与此同时，本窗口成交额约3.67万USDT，只比前一等长窗口增加15.8%。也就是说，财报后的第二段价格抬升很清楚，但量能没有同步爆发。 为什么市场愿意先抬估值？公司披露的季度营收为19.35亿美元，同比增长93%、环比增长19%，比此前公司给出的指引上沿高约7.4%；其中美国商业收入7.64亿美元，同比增长149%。更重要的是，全年营收指引被上调至81.5亿—81.6亿美元。我的判断是，这不是单一概念词带来的脉冲，而是“增长加速、指引再上MU Technical Levels
Resistance: 885–900 (previous support turned resistance, strong 4H resistance) → 960 (right-side reversal confirmation line, only for spot) → 1031 (daily super trend line, mid-term bull-bear boundary)
Bull-Bear Watershed: 830–840 (underlying stock close at 829.5 + on-chain consensus zone, if you are above 850 = off-market premium bullish position, break below 830 = return to underlying stock logic)
Support: 800–820 (4H volume cluster) → 770–786 (8/3 intraday low + platform support) → 740–750 (extreme pullback / major bear target)
Comparison with SNDKUSDT (both are US stock synthetic contracts)
SNDK 1316: anchor 1288, premium +2.2%, SanDisk AI NAND logic is purer, more elastic, and volatile
MU 850: anchor 829.5, premium +2.5%, Micron DRAM+HBM dual lines but institutional bulls and bears fighting (Burry short vs data center bulls), crowded long positions, positive funding rate, open interest declining → rebound carries stampede risk Both are constrained by "tonight's US stock market opening gap convergence," the 850 price level is artificially high during off-market periods, do not place orders strictly at the 850 anchor, reserve slippage around 829.5±2%
Off-market Trading Reminder
Currently, the Asia-Europe session is a US stock market closed window, MUUSDT liquidity is much thinner than BTC, spikes to 865 or 820 near 850 are normal
21:30, 5–10 minutes before the underlying stock opens, reverse sweeps are most common, heavy long positions above the 830 watershed = betting the premium will not be given back
50x leverage near the 829.5 underlying stock anchor point, a single gap jump can cause liquidationBreaking news: negotiations between Iran and Oman on the opening of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz are close to finalizing, but the statements between the US and Iran are seriously divided, and the contest is far from over. According to the plan disclosed by the Iranian side: merchant ships would be allowed to travel separately, entering the Persian Gulf via the Iranian side and sailing out via the Omani side; Passing ships pay service fees, and the profits are split equally between the two countries. However, the U.S. side directly denied the claim of charges, emphasizing that the route setting does not require Iranian approval. Bigger hard conditions are on the surface: even if Iran and Afghanistan reach a shipping agreement, if the U.S. does not lift the blockade on Iranian ports or reinstate the 14-point memorandum of understanding, Iran can still continue closing the strait. In other words, ≠ negotiations are close to being reached, the strait will be fully opened immediately, but diplomacy is only a window of opportunity, and the root of the conflict has not been resolved. Mapping to the container shipping Europe route: the market has already moved past the unilateral surge, entering a consolidating pattern with weak fundamentals and geopolitical risk premiums providing a bottoming out. • If tensions in the Middle East resurface, shipping companies may reroute or suspend more routes, war insurance premiums will rise, and risk premiums will continue to push up near-month contracts; • If the situation substantially eases and risk premiums quickly fade, the market will return to freight fundamentals and give back previous gains. ✅ → the landing of general aviation, geopolitical premiums have faded, putting pressure on oil prices; ❌ Negotiations broke down→ lockdown risks resurfaced, driving oil prices higher. The news is volatile, maintaining high volatility. Key Points for Future Market Tracking 1. Actual traffic data for the Mandeb Strait and the Strait of Hormuz; 2. Plans for major shipping companies to suspend sailings or adjust routes; 3. Changes in shipping war insurance rates. Trading strategy: prioritize range-bound fluctuations, with geopolitical news fluctuating frequentlyBrothers, there's a signal even more heartbreaking than F&G 28: Coinbase premium has been negative for 77 consecutive days. To put it simply — Americans have been net selling BTC for two and a half months straight, one of the biggest buyers in the market is sitting quietly in the corner.
BTC is now at 62,528, 24h -0.93%. It looks like it hasn't moved, but actually no one is buying or selling aggressively; it's all just existing volume chopping each other.
Breaking down some numbers: breadth 6 up, 9 down (only 40% of coins are green), volume ratio down 31.3%, OI still stubbornly high at 111,400 BTC. This is not stabilization, it's "US capital has withdrawn, the market is playing by itself."
For BTC, it's a dull bottoming process; for ETH, it's a weaker tier of decline; for altcoins, liquidity is being drained — GRVT up +14.55% is one of the very few still shining, KAITO down -16.1% is the norm.
A self-deprecating note: the more I analyze this situation, the more hesitant I am to act. The last time I trusted the "bottom" and bought in, I'm still in the red now. Contrary indicators are not fit for bottom fishing.
Here's something you can take away: Coinbase premium + F&G + breadth, the three-piece set to watch the "US capital attitude." Premium negative for consecutive days + F&G stuck at 20-35 + breadth <50% is not a bottom, it's a "confirmation of US capital absence." The real bottom comes when the premium turns positive.
Don't mistake sideways trading for a bottom; sideways is sideways, bottom is something else. The market doesn't lack smart people, it lacks patience to wait.
Friends, what do you think about Coinbase premium being negative for these 77 days? Has US capital really withdrawn, or is it just quietly buying elsewhere? Let's discuss in the comments, let's see who gets it right.
#BTC #ETH #CoinbasePremium #MarketSentiment #AltcoinSeason #MarketAnalysis #OKXPlanet #VolumeContraction #USStockCorrelation #CapitalFlow The US-Iran negotiations will commence, fundamentally because the Trump administration, under the persuasion of Middle Eastern allies like Saudi Arabia, abandoned large-scale military strikes against Iran and shifted to diplomatic bargaining; the market is betting on the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz and the potential implementation of a denuclearization agreement, causing geopolitical premiums to rapidly fade.
Short-term asset reactions are sharply divergent: New York crude oil futures CL 📉 fell as panic over supply disruptions subsided, with WTI dropping over 9% at one point and Brent falling over 7%; COMEX gold XAU 📈 rose as falling oil prices lowered inflation expectations, boosting rate cut bets, with spot gold opening nearly $40 higher; Nasdaq 100 futures 📈 saw risk appetite recover, with Nasdaq 100 futures up 0.78% and S&P 500 futures up 0.44%.
In the long term, if negotiations proceed smoothly, the oil price baseline will still shift downward 📉, while US stocks and gold will lean upward 📈 under rate cut expectations; however, Iran emphasized that the situation in the Strait of Hormuz "will not return to pre-conflict conditions," so uncertainties remain in the talks. If negotiations break down, oil prices will rebound 📈, and US stocks and gold will come under pressure 📉. Overall, it is advisable to "go short-term long on risk assets and take a long-term view on the realization of the negotiations." A whale staked 112,000 $ETH in three weeks, so why is the price still hovering around $1850?
According to on-chain data from Lookonchain and Arkham, the address 0x2e80 recently withdrew 19,000 $ETH from Gemini, worth about $35.44 million, then transferred it to the Ethereum beacon chain staking contract. Over the past three weeks, this address has withdrawn a total of 112,000 ETH from Gemini, with a total value of about $208 million, which has been gradually staked.
Converted, the average value of the latest batch of ETH is about $1865, and the average value of the holdings accumulated over three weeks is about $1857. The latest withdrawal of 19,000 accounts for nearly 17% of the total withdrawn in three weeks. This move is worth noting but should not be simply interpreted as "the whale just bought $35.44 million worth of ETH on the market."
Withdrawing from the exchange and staking first means these ETH have left the liquid environment where they could be sold at any time, reducing short-term sellable supply; secondly, entering the staking contract means the holder prefers long-term holding and earning on-chain rewards rather than preparing for short-term trading within days. For the supply structure of $ETH, this is a relatively positive signal.
However, it does not equal new spot buying. The coins may have already been purchased in the Gemini account earlier; what is happening now is just a change in custody position. Therefore, on-chain outflows can indicate holding intentions but cannot alone prove that the price will immediately rise.
Whales are patient, but the candlestick chart is not showing much favor for now.
Currently, $ETH is priced at $1855.85, with a 24-hour low of $1836.71 and a high of $1876.65, a range volatility of about 2.17%. On the one-hour chart, the price remains below the MA5 at $1859.94, MA10 at $1861.73, and MA20 at $1864.11. These three moving averages cluster between $1860 and $1865, forming a short-term resistance band.
After rebounding from the low of $1821.91, ETH has attempted to test the $1880–$1890 range multiple times but failed to sustain, indicating that selling pressure above has not been fully absorbed. The latest one-hour candlestick fluctuates between $1854.09 and $1858.94, with volatility only 0.26%, and volume has not significantly increased. The market currently seems to be waiting for direction rather than forming a breakout trend.
Next, I will watch two price levels.
Upward, first see if $1865 can be reclaimed with volume; only after stabilizing above it can there be conditions to retest $1877 and $1890; if pressure continues and it falls below $1836, the previous low near $1822 may be tested again. Once $1820 is broken, the short-term structure will turn weaker.
So this whale staking is more like a medium-to-long-term vote of confidence rather than an immediate price-pumping button. On-chain supply is tightening, but short-term price is still suppressed by moving averages—these two are not contradictory, just different timeframes.
This is only my personal market observation and does not constitute investment advice. DYOR.
#交易之声：你的经验值得被听到 "August 4 Morning Session Review: Exchange Rate News Was Just a Trigger, Not the Main Cause"
Looking back at the U.S. stock market's morning session on August 4, the yen intervention news was more of a trigger for the market.
The Nasdaq remained range-bound, with the real underlying logic still being sector fund rotation.
AI software stocks, backed by solid earnings, showed stronger resilience against news shocks.
Microsoft fluctuated during the session, with institutional core holdings remaining largely stable.
NVIDIA, at a high level, faced considerable profit-taking pressure.
The exchange rate news amplified the willingness to take profits, intensifying intraday volatility.
The memory sector was already experiencing capital outflows, and external news further suppressed the market.
SK Hynix weakened short-term along with the sector, but the long-term HBM logic remains unchanged.
SanDisk's rebound lacked sustainability, and the weak pattern has yet to improve.
Even without the exchange rate event, the memory sector is in a capital outflow cycle.
External news only accelerates short-term fluctuations and does not alter the medium- to long-term sector trajectory.
Many traders attributed the entire morning decline solely to the U.S.-Japan yen intervention.
They overlooked the existing valuation divergence within the tech sector itself.
In a structural market, stock selection is far more critical than predicting overall market direction.
Operationally, continue to avoid weak memory stocks and focus on mainline themes while waiting for opportunities. #从降息到加息，联储分歧全公开 #财报观察员：AMD与SpaceX交卷在即，Circle压轴 #Palantir营收增93%，盘后涨13% On the morning of August 4th in the US stock market, the market began to price in the chain reaction caused by the yen's strengthening.
$BTC and the Nasdaq did not show a one-sided trend, maintaining a wide range of fluctuations after the opening. $ETH
AI application-related heavyweights showed strong resilience, withstanding the emotional impact of the early session. $SNDK
Microsoft fluctuated, with no obvious signs of long-term institutional fund withdrawal.
Nvidia's long-short battle intensified, and the high-level consolidation cycle continues.
The storage sector's profit-making effect is weak, and funds continue to maintain an avoidance stance.
SK Hynix experienced a pullback dragged down by market sentiment, but value still exists in the segmented track.
SanDisk still has not made a decent rebound, with short-selling forces firmly dominating the market.
The market worries that the yen's rebound will trigger large-scale carry trade liquidation.
Such liquidation would indirectly lead to passive selling of US stock risk assets.
However, from the early session's trading volume, large-scale sell-offs have not truly appeared.
It is more of a preemptive risk aversion on the trading side, an early emotional reaction.
Tech leaders with strong earnings certainty are more likely to withstand external news disturbances.
Unpopular hardware sectors tend to amplify the downward volatility caused by external news.
The early session is not suitable for aggressive opening positions; priority should be given to observing the strength of market support. #从降息到加息，联储分歧全公开 #财报观察员：AMD与SpaceX交卷在即，Circle压轴 #Palantir营收增93%，盘后涨13% Behind the lively rankings, Qian Qian actually walked quietly and was very picky. Have you noticed that the ones truly rising right now aren't the loudest shouts, but the ones structurally the most "holding up"? I flipped through the market tonight. My first impression was that while the surface was lively, the underlying level was very restrained. $BEAT This name sounds hot, but the capital hasn't really sustained it; it's mostly short-term traders testing the waters back and forth. What is truly sustained are the established anchors like $BTC, $ETH, and $SOL, as well as $KAITO, $CORE, $ZEC stocks with independent logic that catch up on gains. If you zoom in on the structure of derivatives, you'll notice an interesting detail: BTC's perpetual contract funding rate hasn't overheated, indicating that leveraged funds haven't rushed to buy long. This round of rally seems more like spot buying slowly pushing forward. In other words, the market doesn't rise by sentiment, but by real money and cash in turnover. - On the ETH side, the implied volatility in the options market is quietly rising, indicating that institutions are positioning for future volatility, not just the spot price. - SOL's long positions are concentrated in near-month contracts, with insufficient far-month depth, indicating that market confidence in its medium-term term is still being confirmed. - As for $DOGE, $WLD, $TAO, these are more like emotional thermometers; funds are tentatively allocated and have not yet reached a unified direction. My own understanding is that at this stage, the market is trading "certainty" rather than "imagination." Those with ETF expectations, institutional participation, and so onYen Soars on Monday but Not Due to "State Team" Intervention? Data Reveals the Truth
The market speculated all day about "Japan stepping in," but it might not have happened at all.
---
Event Reconstruction: The surge is real, but the intervention is fake?
On Monday, the yen suddenly appreciated sharply, causing a market uproar—"The Bank of Japan intervened for the third consecutive day!" Traders rushed into yen, fearing missing out on policy benefits.
However, data released by the Bank of Japan on Tuesday poured cold water on this:
▌Key Data Breakdown:
· Wednesday’s funding gap forecast: ¥3.38 trillion (about $21.43 billion)
· Broker previous forecast range: ¥2.32 trillion to ¥2.6 trillion
· Core difference: forecast value is about ¥0.78 trillion to ¥1.06 trillion higher
If it were truly foreign exchange intervention, the Bank of Japan’s current account balance would typically show a large-scale capital outflow. But the data released on Tuesday did not show this feature.
So why did the yen rise?
This is even more interesting. Without the "state team" support, the yen still surged violently, indicating:
1. The market itself is going long on the yen—not because of intervention, but due to expectations;
2. The classic scenario of "buying on rumors, selling on facts"—the market priced in intervention in advance, but when it didn’t come, what happens next is intriguing;
3. The expectation of a narrowing US-Japan interest rate differential is self-reinforcing—even if the central bank didn’t act, the market is "acting on its behalf."
Key points for you:
1. ¥3.38 trillion vs. ¥2.32 trillion–¥2.6 trillion—the funding gap forecast is nearly ¥1 trillion higher than normal, but this is precisely evidence of no intervention (if there was intervention, the gap would show as capital outflow from the central bank’s account, not an unexplained increase);
2. A "surge without intervention" is more alarming than a "surge with intervention"—indicating market sentiment has already shifted spontaneously, and yen shorts are retreating;
3. The Bank of Japan’s "expectation management" is becoming more sophisticated—no need to actually spend money, just a hint can make the market move on its own;
4. Next, watch the USD/JPY exchange rate range of 153–155—if this level is broken without signs of intervention, yen bulls may accelerate their inflow.
---
#YenExchangeRate #BankOfJapan #ForexIntervention #USJapanInterestRateDifferential
⚠️ This article is based on publicly available data from the Bank of Japan and does not constitute any exchange rate trading advice. The forex market is highly volatile; leverage trading requires extreme caution.
In summary: The market scared itself, the yen rose, but the Bank of Japan’s wallet didn’t move—this is more worth savoring than actual intervention.[Pharaoh Market Watch]
ISM hits a four-year high, while U.S. Treasury yields fall—Is this script written backwards?
Pharaoh says directly: the stronger the economy, the higher U.S. Treasuries rise, indicating the market is playing a reverse pricing game of "good data = bad news." The ISM Manufacturing PMI surged from 53.3 to 55.6, the highest since May 2022, far exceeding the expected 54, with new orders and employment booming. When the data came out, the market's first reaction was not to buy the dollar but to buy U.S. Treasuries, with the 10-year yield dropping 5 basis points.
Why? Because Trump paused large-scale strikes on Iran, oil prices plunged 5.4%, directly collapsing inflation expectations. With inflation easing, U.S. Treasuries rose. The current script is: geopolitical tensions cool → oil prices fall → inflation cools → U.S. Treasuries rise, while the economy's strength becomes a supporting role.
On the Bitcoin side, easing geopolitical risks have temporarily restored risk appetite, but the ISM data reinforces the Fed's expectation of "maintaining high interest rates for a longer time," which is a long-term drag on risk assets. Short term looks like a rebound; mid term depends on how rate hike expectations evolve.
Follow Pharaoh, and your wealth won't get lost! $BTC $ETH $BICO #ISM创四年新高，美债收益率反跌 Brother Zhuang targeting me again? Woke up from a nap, and my short position was gone……
Family, I really give up.
BTC short position, entry price 63680.5, liquidation price 64029.2, loss -5.21U, return rate -105%.
Opened the short at noon, took a nap, woke up and it was gone.
📌 How did this position disappear?
After opening the short, BTC did drop a bit, hitting a low of 62410, and the floating profit was pretty good at that time.
I thought, “It’s steady, this move is going to work,” then went to sleep peacefully.
But when I woke up: a big bullish candle shot straight from 62410 to 64249, up over 1800 points!
My short was liquidated at 64029, precisely hit by this spike.
After the spike, the price fell back to around 63500.
What does this mean? Was it specifically to liquidate me?
🔍 What happened?
On the news front, the positive development of the US and Iran returning to the negotiation table kept fermenting. Oil prices gave back gains, and risk assets rebounded across the board. BTC, as a representative risk asset, naturally followed the rise.
But that’s not the main point. The key is: this spike came too suddenly.
From 62410 to 64249, an 1800-point increase, almost a straight line up. Such a level of surge is clearly caused by big players scooping up or a concentrated short squeeze triggering a cascade liquidation.
After the rise, the price fell back. This shows it wasn’t a trend-driven rally but a short-term speculative move—specifically to liquidate shorts.
💡 What went wrong?
First, 100x leverage leaves almost no room for error.
Entry price 63680, liquidation price 64029, only 349 points difference, about 0.5%.
BTC’s normal volatility easily breaks 0.5%. With 100x leverage, any reverse move over 0.5% will liquidate you.
Second, no trailing take profit set during the nap.
I did set a stop loss when opening, but when the price dropped to 62410, I didn’t move the stop loss down.
If I had moved the stop loss to 62800 or 63000 then, even if it rebounded, I could have secured some profit. But I did nothing and went to sleep.
Third, the risk of news reversal always exists.
US-Iran talks resuming, changes in rate hike expectations… these news can change market direction anytime. With 100x leverage, any news reversal is fatal.
🎯 What’s next?
1. I’ll avoid 100x leverage for now.
This is the second time I’ve been precisely liquidated due to high leverage. Both BTC shorts were wiped out by a spike, then the price returned to the original level.
Lower leverage might earn slower, but at least I survive.
2. Set trailing take profit before sleeping.
If holding positions overnight or taking naps, always set trailing take profit. Don’t let the market “ambush” me when I’m not watching.
3. Hold back until the news is clear.
US-Iran talks, Fed policies, earnings season… before these major events settle, market direction can reverse anytime. Wait for a clear trend before acting.
Final words
Family, I’m really speechless about this spike.
Shorted, dropped to 62410, floating profit was good. Took a nap, shot up to 64249, liquidated directly. After liquidation, back to 63500.
It’s all unrelated to me now, money gone, position gone.
Two BTC shorts:
· First: shorted at 63208, liquidated at 63720
· Second: shorted at 63680, liquidated at 64029
Both precisely liquidated, then price fell back.
Brother Zhuang, are you really targeting me? 🤡
(Purely personal trading record, not investment advice.)
$BTC
#从降息到加息，联储分歧全公开
#ISM创四年新高，美债收益率反跌
#Palantir营收增93%，盘后涨13% US July manufacturing data significantly exceeded expectations, yet US Treasury yields moved downward. This time, the market's pricing order is very clear.
The ISM Manufacturing PMI rose from 53.3 in June to 55.6, above the market expectation of 53.9, marking the 7th consecutive month in expansion territory and the highest level since May 2022.
Internal data also showed strength:
New orders index at 56.7, expanding for the 7th consecutive month;
Production index jumped from 52.2 to 58.5, a single-month increase of 6.3 points, the highest since November 2021;
Employment index rose from 49.7 to 52.8, ending 32 consecutive months of contraction;
Backlog of orders index increased from 50.5 to 55.0;
Export orders rose from 48.5 to 53.0, returning to expansion territory.
If only considering economic growth and employment, this report should support higher interest rates. Although the prices index fell from 73.0 to 71.1, it remains well above 50, indicating that manufacturing input costs have not truly cooled down.
However, the 10-year US Treasury yield actually dropped 5.9 basis points that day, closing at 4.684%. The reason comes from another set of more direct inflation data: after easing expectations of US-Iran negotiations, Brent crude oil fell about 5% to $83.47, and WTI dropped to $79.47.
In July, oil prices had risen over 20% due to Middle East tensions. Once energy prices quickly retreat, the market will revise downward inflation compensation for the coming months. Thus, the inflation cooling expectation brought by oil prices temporarily outweighed the rate hike pressure from the strong PMI.
Risk assets responded typically: the S&P 500 rose 1.5%, Nasdaq increased 2.1%, Dow Jones rose 1.3% and hit a new closing high. As of 17:48 Beijing time, BTC was around $63,490, with an intraday range of 62,387 to 64,117 USD.
Whether this rebound can continue depends not on individual PMI data but on which of two forces can persist: continued manufacturing recovery strengthening rate hike expectations, or further oil price declines suppressing inflation expectations.
Currently, the market has chosen the latter. But with the prices index still at 71.1, this pricing story is far from over.
#ISM创四年新高，美债收益率反跌 The very first move: The most dangerous piece on the board is never the king being checked, but the fortress you thought was firmly in your grasp suddenly turning into a checkmate your opponent gained by sacrificing a piece.
That data table from Yonhap News Agency looks exactly like a rule change in the endgame where the referee suddenly alters the pawn promotion rule—the margin threshold for single-stock leveraged ETFs was raised from 10 million KRW to 30 million KRW. Sixteen leveraged and inverse products tracking Samsung and SK Hynix saw their trading volume plummet from 12.4 trillion KRW on July 30 to just 1.24 trillion KRW on August 3, only one-tenth remaining. This is not ordinary volume contraction; it’s like in the middle game when you realize all your attacking pieces are pinned down by your opponent’s "chain-like restraint." The KOSPI plunged 18% over three days, then surged 17.91% in a single day on July 31, marking the largest gain in history, only to give back 5 points on August 3. Chess players understand clearly: this is a classic "flash check" followed deliberately by a "transitional sacrifice" to lure you in and then wait for you to catch up.
True grandmasters always calculate the position twenty moves ahead. The so-called "memory chip supercycle possibly lasting until 2029 to 2030" sounds like a magnificent Queen’s Gambit Declined, but the premise is that you must survive the brutal middle-game slaughter. After the leverage is pulled away, is the remaining buying power real muscle or just a bluff of paper strength? This week is the decisive round. I’ve seen too many players sacrifice an entire rook line for a beautiful check, only for the opponent to wait in the corner, and twenty moves later, the king has nowhere to run.
In this Korean game, leverage is the elephant forcibly restricted—when its range shrinks from the whole board to just two squares, all your tactical plans must be rebuilt. The $XLLY linkage on the US stock side is like a mirror of the same game; every move reflected back changes the situation here. But players must remember: what you see in the mirror might be yourself or a hidden dagger in the endgame.
This week, the board will speak for itself. And I have already calculated that move. #koreaetfvoldown90 SPCX (SpaceX) Earnings Report + Unlock Impact on the Market
Three Earnings Scenarios
1. Earnings significantly exceed expectations (revenue, Starlink users, loss narrowing)
• Short-term will trigger a corrective rebound, but it's difficult to sustain a major bull market; the unlock selling pressure will come immediately afterward, so the rebound is more of a pump-and-dump, with heavy selling pressure above.
• For crypto Musk-concept small coins: short-term sentiment drives spikes, which are news-driven and lack long-term support.
2. Earnings meet market expectations
• No strong positive catalyst; funds trade the unlock downside in advance, resulting in overall weak oscillation, frequent spikes, intense long-short battles, and difficulty in forming a one-sided trend.
3. Earnings miss expectations, losses widen further
• Valuation logic is hit, bears intensify, combined with unlock expectations, accelerating downside and further valuation correction.
The destructive power of the unlock (more critical than earnings)
On August 6, a massive amount of shares will unlock; early investors have very low cost bases and strong selling intentions.
• Even if earnings look good, the unlock will suppress upside space;
• If earnings disappoint, the unlock will amplify the decline;
• The circulating supply will expand significantly, eliminating the previous "scarcity of chips" speculation logic.
Practical trading insights
1. Spot: Not suitable for heavy bottom-fishing; dual risks from earnings + unlock; better to wait for events to unfold and selling pressure to be absorbed before looking for right-side opportunities;
2. Futures: Volatility will surge, spikes will be very frequent; be sure to reduce position size, widen stop losses, and avoid betting on a single direction; $SPCX #财报观察员：AMD与SpaceX交卷在即，Circle压轴 #SPCX首份财报将公布，千亿美元解禁在即 Looking back now, dYdX Labs' launch of arcus_xyz on RobinhoodApp Chain is both a success and a failure.
Successes include:
Arcus becoming the absolute leader in perp DEX on RH Chain, with perp trading volume accounting for over 80%;
Failures include:
It has not brought any substantial empowerment to $DYDX, and even caused adverse effects;
Arcus' 7-day perp trading volume ($162.25M) has already surpassed dYdX Chain ($151.47M), causing a significant diversion. As a brand almost completely independent from dYdX, Arcus provides no actual, realized empowerment to $DYDX.
Of course, dYdX Labs also gave $DYDX holders an IOU: if Arcus issues tokens in the future, a portion of the airdrop will be given to the dYdX community. Since Arcus went live on RH Chain mainnet, the $DYDX token has dropped by 15%.
When the protocol thrives, holders suffer; when the protocol fails, holders suffer.Fundamental Research Report $GRASS / Grass (DePIN) $0.30 (24h -3.90%)
Core Judgment: Grass ($GRASS) comprehensive score 25/100, rating mainly relies on narrative. Breaking down into three layers, the company team resources are tight, protocol network usage evidence is weak, and token value transmission still needs observation.
Fundamental Breakdown: Grass (token $GRASS), DePIN sector. Focuses on bandwidth DePIN and data collection nodes. Benchmarked against HNT, RNDR. Traditional computing power rental giants like AWS and CoreWeave charge by GPU hours, with A100 monthly rent at $12,000-$25,000, expensive and high threshold. On-chain solutions fragment computing power for bidding, suppliers require no centralized review, turning idle GPUs into available supply. Customer unit price $50-$500/month, settlement in USDC or fiat currency. Narrative-driven sector, usage drops 60-80% in bear markets. Positioned as an end-to-end vertical platform. Product implementation: main evidence from announcements, no verifiable usage yet. Latest version not found, 0 valid commits in the past 90 days.
User side, address MAU not disclosed, DAU not disclosed, 24h trading volume $11.47M, TVL not found. Wallet addresses do not equal natural person monthly active users; large addresses concentrated holdings may overestimate real user count. Revenue side, user fees not disclosed, supplier income about 80-90% of user fees (to LPs and nodes), protocol treasury income not disclosed, token holder buyback and burn annualized has no burn mechanism. 24h trading volume is business turnover, not revenue. Company profit does not equal protocol profit, protocol profit does not equal token holder profit. Code side, 0 valid commits in 90 days, active contributors not found, latest version not found. GitHub is A-level evidence for direct verification. Investment background, company equity financing checked via PitchBook/Crunchbase (A-level), token private and public sales checked via whitepaper, release schedule, and on-chain unlock contracts (A-level), market makers and ecosystem funding are B-level, not representing long-term holdings by technical VCs, technical integration checked via API/SDK access evidence (B-level), strategic partnerships and logo walls are D-level. NVIDIA GPU usage does not equal NVIDIA investment, exchange listing does not equal exchange strategic investment.
Token side, total supply 1,000,000,000.0, circulating 654,552,795.0 (65.5%), FDV $299.58M, next unlock not disclosed (percentage of circulating not disclosed), no clear annualized buyback and burn. Must buy tokens to use product? Partially yes, medium value capture (staking/discount/governance). Compared with peers (uniform criteria, no cross-sector comparison): Circulating market cap: Grass $196.09M, HNT undisclosed, RNDR undisclosed. FDV: Grass $299.58M, HNT undisclosed, RNDR undisclosed. Annual revenue: Grass undisclosed, HNT undisclosed, RNDR undisclosed. Monthly active addresses or users: Grass undisclosed, HNT undisclosed, RNDR undisclosed. Figures based on public data snapshots, some missing data supplemented by official reports or industry standards. Valuation: circulating market cap $196.09M, FDV $299.58M, P/S N/A (revenue missing, valuation anchor invalid), FDV divided by revenue N/A. Pessimistic view: $196.09M discounted 50-70%, neutral range oscillation, optimistic view: revenue doubles, burn implemented, enterprise clients join, FDV P/S aligns with top players.
Final judgment: insufficient evidence, mainly narrative (score 25/100). Token value transmission path unclear, only governance incentives. Circulating market cap relatively reasonable or low compared to fundamentals, FDV moderate. Risks to note: short-term large unlock dumping, protocol income long-term zero, token demand relies solely on incentives (usage collapses if incentives stop). Follow-up tracking: protocol fee weekly, burn amount, active address retention, TVL/loan balance, GitHub version releases. Information sources are public, logic self-developed, not investment advice. Data deviation over 30% requires re-evaluation.
Report ends here, welcome to discuss.
#FundamentalResearchReport #Crypto #Research #OKXOrbit$BTC
The correlation between Nasdaq and BTC is getting stronger. Will a sharp drop in the US stock market drag down the crypto space?
In recent years, a growing phenomenon has been occurring: Bitcoin is becoming more and more like a tech stock. Many used to think of BTC as "digital gold," which should maintain some independence from traditional markets. However, with institutional funds, spot ETFs, and Wall Street capital entering, the correlation between the crypto market and the Nasdaq index has clearly increased.
This raises a question:
If the US stock market, especially Nasdaq, experiences a significant drop, will Bitcoin be dragged down as well?
The answer is: possibly in the short term, but not necessarily in the long term.
Why would it be affected in the short term?
Because the participants in the BTC market have changed. Previously, Bitcoin was mainly driven by retail investors, but now more and more institutions allocate BTC through ETFs, funds, and other means. When Nasdaq falls sharply, it usually means market risk appetite declines, and institutions reduce positions in high-volatility assets, including tech stocks and crypto assets.
Simply put:
Tech stocks rise → risk sentiment improves → capital seeks high-yield assets → BTC benefits.
Tech stocks fall → risk sentiment worsens → capital seeks safety → BTC comes under pressure.
This explains why BTC often falls in sync with sharp fluctuations in the US stock market.
But it’s important to note that BTC does not simply replicate Nasdaq’s movements.
In the long run, Bitcoin has its own cycle logic, including halving cycles, ETF capital inflows, on-chain supply and demand changes, and the global monetary environment. When market liquidity improves and the US dollar weakens, even if tech stocks perform mediocrely, BTC can still have an independent rally.
Two scenarios may occur in the future market:
First, if the US stock market decline is due to recession concerns.
For example, corporate earnings decline, employment worsens, and capital seeks comprehensive safety, then BTC may follow risk assets in the short term.
Second, if the US stock market adjustment is just a valuation correction.
For instance, a normal pullback after a large gain in the AI sector, but the economy remains resilient and the Federal Reserve starts signaling easing, then capital might flow from some tech stocks to other assets, and BTC could become a new choice for funds.
For traders, judging BTC’s trend now cannot rely solely on watching Nasdaq.
More importantly, observe three indicators:
US Treasury yields
A decline in yields usually benefits risk assets.
US Dollar Index
A weaker dollar often provides a better environment for BTC to rise.
ETF capital flows
Whether institutional funds continue to buy is a key factor distinguishing BTC from ordinary risk assets.
Therefore, the increased correlation between Nasdaq and BTC does not mean Bitcoin has lost its independent value; rather, it shows it is entering the global financial system.
Future BTC may have both tech stock attributes and monetary asset attributes.
In the short term, a sharp drop in US stocks may drag down crypto sentiment; in the long term, what truly determines BTC’s direction remains global liquidity, institutional funds, and the market’s revaluation of digital asset value.
For traders, the biggest change is: previously, to watch BTC, you only needed to look at on-chain and technical aspects; now you must also watch Wall Street. Korean Hynix is not following the US stock market; once the US stock premium in the night session opens, it immediately drops, showing very weak momentum.
This may be related to the capital structure. Wall Street funds have already sold off and started to shift investments into AI giants like Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, and Google. The speculation on the upstream hardware supply chain is probably almost completely over.$DOGE 【DOGE sideways at 0.07, is the bottom still a consolidation?】
DOGE has been hovering around 0.07 for several days, with a volatility of less than 3% and sluggish trading volume.
News: House of Doge teams up with Paxos to expand global payment coverage; Billy Markus opposes ending merged mining with Litecoin; official response to "no developers" criticism emphasizes the team is continuously building.
On-chain: Whales have bought about 200 million DOGE near 0.07 in the past week, indicating large funds recognize this price level. However, exchange trading volume is only $8.9 million, far below the average.
Technical: 0.07-0.071 is a key support zone; if broken, look for 0.065-0.066; resistance above is 0.073-0.075, reclaiming 0.075 is needed to open up space.
Strategy: Follow through on a volume breakout above 0.075; exit if it falls below 0.07; stay on the sidelines in between. #从降息到加息，联储分歧全公开 #财报观察员：AMD与SpaceX交卷在即，Circle压轴 #Palantir营收增93%，盘后涨13% $BTC $ETH BTC is approaching a critical turning point.
Currently, the price is squeezed between two important zones:
Above: the continuously descending bear market resistance band (≈ $69K)
Below: the steadily rising 200-week moving average (≈ $63K)
This compression zone cannot be maintained indefinitely; the market is very likely to choose a direction in the coming months.
On-chain data also shows that the cycle reset is not yet fully complete, with indicators like MVRV still some distance from historical bear market bottom zones.
Additionally, historically in mid-cycle years, the pattern often shows:
Strong July → Adjustment in August.
Similar rhythms appeared in 2014, 2018, and 2022.
However, short-term price is unpredictable; what really needs attention is:
Breaking above $69K:
→ Re-entering a strong cycle
Falling below the 200-week moving average:
→ Possibly starting a deeper correction
The most important thing now is not to guess the top or bottom, but to wait for the market to complete its choice. $BTC #从降息到加息，联储分歧全公开 #财报观察员：AMD与SpaceX交卷在即，Circle压轴 #Palantir营收增93%，盘后涨13% Many people dig up old Zhihu posts like “Bought BTC for 6000 yuan,” and their first reaction is: If I had bought it back then, wouldn’t I have achieved financial freedom by now?
But the truly painful comments usually come afterward.
What we see today is the result after 2017, the path where the BTC myth has already played out.
But if we really go back to 2013, 2014, 2015, or 2016, ordinary people didn’t face a rising curve but a series of crashes, thefts, policy shocks, price halving, and public skepticism.
In 2013, policy risks struck suddenly, causing the market to plunge sharply;
In 2014, those heavily invested couldn’t hold on and cut losses to exit;
In 2015, the bear market dragged on relentlessly, even believers began to doubt their faith;
In 2016, Bitfinex was hacked, and exchange risks were laid bare for everyone.
So the question was never: Why didn’t I buy back then?
The real question is: If you had bought back then, could you really have held on until today?
💡 Many wealth stories look very simple in hindsight, as if you just needed to buy, hold, forget your password, and you’d have won effortlessly after a few years.
But the living people in the market aren’t cold backtest data.
You panic, you doubt, you can’t help but check the news, you get persuaded by people around you to quit, and during crashes, you repeatedly ask yourself: Am I wrong?
🔍 That’s also why I think the greatest value of these kinds of crypto archaeology posts isn’t to make people regret,
but to remind us:
What’s truly scarce is never a single “right buy,” but the ability to maintain awareness, manage position sizing well, endure emotional swings amid huge uncertainty, and ultimately survive.
Missing out on Bitcoin is indeed a pity.
But if your past self wasn’t ready at all, then having fun, eating well, and living normally might not be a bad thing.
The hardest part of investing is never understanding history in hindsight.
It’s whether you can get through those darkest moments when history hasn’t yet become history.BlackRock is positioning a stablecoin reserve fund, traditional finance is redefining the crypto market entry
A notable change has recently emerged in the crypto market:
BlackRock, one of the world's largest asset management companies, is setting up fund products specifically serving stablecoin reserves.
The significance behind this may be more important than simply launching two funds.
Because this means:
Stablecoins are gradually moving from internal crypto market tools into the asset management framework of traditional finance.
In recent years, stablecoins have been one of the most important infrastructures in the crypto market.
Stablecoins like USDT and USDC have handled a large volume of on-chain transaction demand.
They connect:
Fiat currency.
Exchanges.
DeFi.
On-chain payments.
According to market data, the total market capitalization of stablecoins has now exceeded $200 billion, becoming one of the largest capital entry points in the crypto market.
But stablecoins have always faced a core issue:
How are reserve assets managed?
Why do users trust that every stablecoin is backed by sufficient assets?
This is also why traditional financial institutions have started paying attention.
Stablecoin issuers typically allocate reserve funds to:
Short-term U.S. Treasury bonds.
Cash.
Money market instruments.
Among these, U.S. Treasuries have become one of the main assets.
Because stablecoins essentially require:
Safety.
Liquidity.
Low-risk returns.
And short-term U.S. Treasuries perfectly meet these needs.
BlackRock's entry into this field sends a very clear signal:
Traditional asset management companies are competing for the digital dollar infrastructure.
In recent years, market focus has mainly been on:
Bitcoin ETFs.
Ethereum ETFs.
Crypto trading platforms.
But the bigger opportunities in the future may come from stablecoins and the on-chain dollar system.
Because stablecoins connect global payments and capital flows.
This has a very direct impact on the crypto market.
The first to benefit may be Ethereum.
Currently, a large amount of stablecoin issuance and trading is concentrated in the Ethereum ecosystem.
The large-scale circulation of USDT and USDC brings substantial transaction demand to the Ethereum network.
If stablecoin scale continues to grow in the future, Ethereum's value as infrastructure may further increase.
Currently, ETH price remains around $1850.
Short-term trends are still influenced by market liquidity, but stablecoin growth is a long-term important variable.
Regarding Bitcoin, BTC price is currently fluctuating around $62,000.
BlackRock previously promoted Bitcoin ETFs entering traditional financial markets, which has already changed BTC's capital structure.
The layout of stablecoin funds represents traditional institutions entering crypto from another direction:
Not by directly purchasing crypto assets.
But by participating in digital financial infrastructure.
SOL is also worth attention.
Currently, SOL price is around $70.
Over the past year, Solana has attracted a large amount of on-chain activity with high transaction speed and low fees.
If stablecoin payments and on-chain transaction scale expand in the future, high-performance public chains may gain more application opportunities.
However, the stablecoin sector will also face competition in the future.
Regulation.
Reserve transparency.
Issuance qualifications.
Compliance requirements.
All will become key to industry development.
Especially under the backdrop of the U.S. promoting the improvement of digital asset regulatory frameworks, stablecoins may become an important breakthrough for traditional finance to enter the crypto market.
My view:
BlackRock's positioning of a stablecoin reserve fund is not just a product move.
It represents a trend:
Traditional finance is shifting from "investing in crypto assets" to "building digital financial infrastructure."
In the past, the market focused on BTC price.
Now institutions are starting to focus on:
Who controls digital dollar flows.
Who manages on-chain funds.
Who becomes the entry point of the future financial system.
Bitcoin solves value storage.
Stablecoins solve value circulation.
And in the next phase, the biggest competition in the crypto market may be shifting from asset issuance to capital infrastructure. $ETH #财报观察员：AMD与SpaceX交卷在即，Circle压轴
The real test of earnings night: not the results, but the expectations
Palantir's revenue grew 93% year-over-year, raised full-year guidance, and surged after hours.
But this report also completely raised the market's appetite.
Next up are AMD, SpaceX, and Circle releasing results one after another. The real question is no longer "whether the performance is good," but:
How good does it have to be to live up to current expectations?
1️⃣ $AMD: The focus is not on revenue beating expectations
The market expects AMD's quarterly revenue to be about $11.3 billion, a year-over-year increase of about 47%.
What really affects the stock price are the data center business, AI chip orders, and next quarter's guidance. If it only slightly beats expectations but does not continue to raise AI growth forecasts, it may instead trigger a "good news already priced in" effect.
2️⃣ $SPCX: Earnings and lock-up expiration approaching simultaneously
This is SpaceX's first quarterly earnings report since going public. The market will not only look at Starlink and launch business but also assess losses and AI investments.
A bigger variable is that after the earnings release, up to about 911.5 million shares may enter the lock-up window.
So even if the performance is good, it is necessary to observe whether the new selling pressure can be absorbed by the market.
3️⃣ $CRCL #: The most easily overlooked macro trade
Circle's core variables are not just USDC circulation but also interest rates.
When interest rates are high, reserve assets can contribute more interest income; if the Fed cuts rates in the future, even if USDC continues to grow, it will face the problem of declining yield per asset.
So what Circle really needs to prove is:
Can stablecoin growth outpace the income pressure caused by rate cuts?
My observation is:
This earnings season is shifting from "as long as it touches AI, it goes up" to "growth must continuously exceed high expectations."
Good numbers are only the first hurdle; guidance, valuation, and share structure determine the next day's movement.
Among the next three companies, who do you think is most likely to experience "good earnings but stock price falls"?
A: AMD
B: SpaceX
C: Circle
#财报观察员：AMD与SpaceX交卷在即，Circle压轴 #AMD #SPCX #Circle #美股 #AI
For market observation only, not investment advice.The construction site never mocks the blueprints, but the structure will. Standing in the shadow of the tower crane looking at this "Newcomer Entry Permit," what I see is not the market, but a plot of land with a foundation yet to be poured—you’re holding a blank sheet that can’t even be called a design drawing, at best a pencil sketch.
A project truly tested by time should reveal bedrock with the first shovel. The so-called "list of mistakes from veterans" is just old crack photos in the hands of site foremen: concrete stress cracks each have their own pattern, but the causes are always only three—insufficient rebar, too short curing period, or an uncompacted foundation. What novices should read most isn’t their experience, but which floor they made mistakes on, then look down at the load-bearing wall beneath their feet to see if it’s made from the same batch of poor-quality cement.
Community Q&A? That’s called blueprint review. At best, it helps you spot a labeling error in CAD, but it won’t save you if you try to build a stadium with a sunshade’s blueprint. The official guide is the construction code manual, worth flipping through, but it assumes you have a level instrument, not just a tape measure. As for expert Q&A—don’t get it wrong, they’re supervisors wearing hard hats, not guarantees that your columns will stand on the ground you chose.
For US stock-linked assets like XPLTR, I take a closer look at its "foundation survey report": Has the geopolitical crack (USIranOilShock) penetrated its groundwater level? Did the oil price cliff (OilCrash141to91) cause uneven settlement of its foundation raft? Is the CPI data (USAprilCPITonight) early-age concrete shrinkage or late-stage carbonation, which determines whether this building will be a landmark or a ruin in five years. Don’t be fooled by the glass reflections on the floor surface; what you need to measure is the anchor bolt depth embedded in the bedrock.
The "best questions" showcased at the top every weekend are just the safety net stars on the scaffolding—seemingly protecting you, but in reality, you’re still hanging midair with no formwork beneath your feet. Losses are the formwork expansion during pouring, profits are the sharp corners after formwork removal, and most people’s principal dies in the afternoon heatwave of some June day—not from the plan, but from waiting too long for the concrete to set.
Remember: the loudest voice in the community usually isn’t the structural engineer, but the cement seller.
Buildings don’t speak, but structures do. #newherestarthere $NMR maintains a huge disconnect between a $3 billion circulating market cap and $2 million annualized protocol revenue, with a 1500x PS valuation pushing the premium on capital far beyond the balance with actual business implementation.
The current unit price of $NMR holds at $3.20, corresponding to a 24-hour trading volume of $80 million, which is only 2.66% of the circulating market cap, indicating low turnover of on-exchange chips and a lack of chasing capital. The $4.2 billion FDV corresponds to a 2100x FDV/revenue ratio. Without a token burn mechanism in place, unreleased chips create long-term premium clearance pressure.
The core variables driving future pricing, in order of priority, are: the actual accumulation rate of protocol fees, the structure of future unlocked chips, and the development activity reflected by 60 code commits within 90 days. The protocol treasury’s $2 million annualized revenue sets the fundamental baseline; without high-frequency real settlements, the high valuation will continue to face correction pressure.
The bullish scenario requires explosive growth on the business side. If weekly protocol fees significantly increase, pushing annualized revenue to $10 million, the PS valuation will quickly compress to 300x, opening space for price revaluation. A 24-hour trading volume breaking through $200 million would serve as a main volume signal. This scenario fails if active contributors drop below 25.
The bearish scenario is catalyzed by selling pressure expectations. Approaching Q4 2026, an additional 3.50% unlock corresponds to about $105 million potential new selling pressure. If protocol revenue cannot improve, capital may exit due to lack of burn protection, pushing the $3 billion circulating market cap down to a 50-70% clearance valuation range; if the official token burn mechanism is introduced before then, the bearish logic fails.
During valuation digestion, the high circulating ratio of 73.1% temporarily eases extreme dump risks, making it more likely for the market to range widely between valuation revaluation and chip release.
In the next 7 days, focus on weekly changes in protocol treasury fees and whether the 24-hour trading volume can hold the $80 million turnover benchmark.
#从降息到加息，联储分歧全公开 #美日确认联合购汇Japan and the US Confirm Joint Currency Purchase: Will the Yen Crisis Ease or Become a New Global Liquidity Variable?
Recently, the market has focused on an important announcement:
The United States and Japan have confirmed they will strengthen cooperation in the foreign exchange market and take joint intervention measures to stabilize exchange rates if necessary.
In simple terms, if the yen continues to experience severe fluctuations, Japan may stabilize the exchange rate by buying yen and selling dollars, with coordination from the US side.
On the surface, this seems like a foreign exchange market issue, but the underlying impact is actually on global capital flows.
For the crypto market, the biggest concern is:
Will yen carry trade arbitrage reverse?
In recent years, Japan has maintained a long-term low interest rate environment, making the yen an important tool for global capital arbitrage.
Many institutions choose to:
Borrow low-cost yen.
Then invest in higher-yielding assets.
These capital flows include:
US tech stocks.
Emerging market assets.
High-yield bonds.
Even cryptocurrencies.
When the market is stable, this trading model can continuously amplify the performance of risk assets.
But the problem is, once the yen rapidly appreciates, carry trades may be forced to close positions.
Investors need to sell risk assets and convert back to yen to repay funds.
This is why during past major yen fluctuations, global markets experienced significant turbulence.
For the crypto market, liquidity changes have always been a core factor.
Currently, Bitcoin price is fluctuating around $62,000.
After BTC failed to break $65,000, it entered an adjustment phase.
Although spot ETFs continue to bring expectations of institutional inflows, the short-term market is still influenced by the macro environment.
If the US-Japan exchange rate stabilizes and market risk aversion decreases, funds may return to risk assets.
But if yen volatility continues to expand, triggering global deleveraging, Bitcoin may face further pressure.
BTC is currently watching:
Support below:
$60,000-$62,000 range.
Resistance above:
$65,000 level.
Ethereum is currently priced around $1,850.
Compared to BTC, ETH is more sensitive to liquidity changes.
Because directions like RWA, DeFi, and stablecoins in the Ethereum ecosystem require active capital.
If global funds re-enter risk mode, ETH may gain new attention.
But if the market enters a risk-off phase, high-valuation assets will still face pressure.
ETH is currently focusing on:
$1,800 support.
SOL is currently maintaining around $70.
Over the past year, Solana has attracted significant capital with its Meme ecosystem, low fees, and high transaction activity.
But SOL is also a highly volatile asset.
When market risk appetite rises, it often becomes a target for capital rotation.
But when global liquidity tightens, SOL is hit more noticeably.
This time, the US-Japan joint currency purchase confirmation is not just about exchange rate intervention.
What truly deserves attention is the market signal behind it:
Global capital is refocusing on exchange rate risk.
In recent years, the market has been accustomed to low-cost funds driving risk asset growth.
But now, any major currency’s sharp fluctuation can affect global capital allocation.
For the crypto market, the next focus should be on:
US dollar trends.
Yen changes.
US Treasury yields.
Institutional capital flows.
BTC watching $62,000 support.
ETH watching $1,800.
SOL watching $70 area.
If the exchange rate market stabilizes and risk appetite recovers, the crypto market may welcome new capital opportunities.
But if carry trade arbitrage reverses and global capital starts reducing risk exposure, the market may still face pressure.
This round of the market is not just a contest of which coin is stronger.
It’s about where global liquidity will ultimately flow. $SOL 1. Currently, the market's sensitivity to MicroStrategy selling BTC has dulled, and the number of institutions participating in the sell-off is limited. Once MicroStrategy's STRC returns to profitability, it will start buying back Bitcoin, returning to a positive cycle.
2. Retail investors have also gradually shifted from absolute panic upon hearing about MicroStrategy selling coins to indifference. This behavior is generally a sign that the negative sentiment has been fully priced in.
3. Coupled with the recent sharp decline in the South Korean stock market and the storage sector, a large amount of crypto assets have shifted to trading stable, high-quality assets like BTC and ETH.
If there are no independent negative events, Bitcoin will gradually recover and may surge to $70,000 before mid-September. $BTC $ETH #韩国杠杆ETF成交额降九成，波幅收窄 Carry trades are cooling down, and a whale has chosen to actively contract. According to TradingBeats monitoring, whales at the start of 0xf17 began selling HYPE spot shares today and closing an equivalent amount of perpetual short positions, planning to continue exiting carry positions. Previously, this address held HYPE spot and contract short positions at nearly a 1:1 ratio, hedged against price fluctuations to earn positive funding rates. Reduction Margin: Based on about 146,800 tokens before reduction, both funds have now dropped to about 107,900 tokens, each down nearly 39,000 tokens, a decrease of about 26.5%. Currently, the nominal value of spot and short positions is about $5.87 million each, with a total size of about $11.74 million, down about $4.24 million from before the reduction. The whale is still reducing interest through two sets of TWAP orders, planning to process a total of 90,000 HYPE: about 33,200 (about $1.8 million) have been sold on the spot side, and about 33,100 (about $1.795 million) have been closed on the contract side. As whales pull out, carry gains fall from highs: From August 1 to 3, HYPE's cumulative funding rate dropped from +0.02790% to +0.02227%, a decrease of about 20.2%; In the past four hours, it has decreased by 19.1% compared to the previous four hours. Based on the current net interest size, its daily gross funding fee income has dropped from about $1,638 to $1,308. Weekly statistics: From July 28 to August 3, the cumulative total was about +0.17803%, which is 16.9% lower than the high week of July 14 to 20, which was +0.21425%.Recently, due to a security vulnerability in the Coldcard wallet, there have indeed been some fund movements on-chain, but this is actually retail investors urgently transferring assets to avoid risk, not large holders panic selling.
You can look at a key data point: recently, those depositing coins into exchanges are basically small wallets holding less than 1 $BTC, indicating retail panic; on the other hand, large holders and institutions holding more than 1 BTC not only have not deposited coins into exchanges, but are actually reducing their deposits, holding their chips steadily.
Therefore, although market sentiment looks very bad, the actual selling pressure is not large. As long as large holders do not panic sell, the underlying support remains solid, so there is no need for everyone to be overly anxious. #交易之声：你的经验值得被听到 ETH spot ETFs saw outflows again yesterday.
On August 3rd Eastern Time, the total net outflow of Ethereum spot ETFs was $11.4178 million. The structure is more worth noting than the numbers:
• BlackRock ETHA had a single-day net outflow of $9.0303 million, the largest loss point
• BlackRock ETHB (staking type) actually had a net inflow of $5.7791 million, ranking first
• Morgan Stanley MSSE had a net inflow of $603,300
On one side, traditional spot ETFs are reducing positions, while on the other, staking-type ETHB is attracting funds—the capital is not simply leaving Ethereum but reallocating between product types.
As of this writing, the total net assets of ETH spot ETFs stand at $10.233 billion, accounting for 4.54% of ETH's total market cap, with a historical cumulative net inflow of $11.199 billion. The large market base remains, but the pace has clearly cooled down.
Current ETH price is 1855.53 (+0.70%), stuck near PP 1857.37. Resistance at R1 1887.57 above, support at S1 1829.59 below. Funding rate is 0.007404%, longs are not overheated.
My view: ETF outflows themselves do not signal a trend reversal, but the continuous bleeding of ETHA and the strength of ETHB indicate institutions prefer "yield-generating ETH exposure." In the short term, watch if 1857 can hold; if 1829 breaks, then consider defense.
Pivot points BTC 63549.1 / R1 64281.27 / S1 62490.67 | ETH 1855.53 / R1 1887.57 / S1 1829.59
$ETH #ETH $BTC #BTC The flow of on-chain asset pools in Ethena is quietly reshaping, with traditional crypto basis arbitrage funds being rapidly replaced by diversified yield-generating assets.
The proportion of traditional crypto basis arbitrage in USDe's underlying assets has shrunk to about 1%, indicating that the protocol's yield performance is beginning to decouple from the volatility of crypto market funding rates.
Capital flow shows that the allocation to DeFi lending and stablecoin liquidity has risen to 39% and 37%, respectively, while external real-world assets also account for 13% of the share.
The tilt of underlying assets toward yield strategies directly reduces the risk of yield loss for the $ENA ecosystem during bear markets or low volatility environments.
If mainstream DeFi protocol lending rates continue to rise, this multi-strategy allocation will boost USDe's overall yield, attracting more on-chain liquidity locking; however, if on-chain lending demand sharply declines, this path will fail.
When introduced RWA assets face credit defaults or smart contracts encounter liquidation risks, delays in liquidity redemption of underlying assets may be triggered, thereby weakening market confidence in the pegged exchange rate.
The market's divergence on this transformation lies in whether diversified allocation comes at the cost of immediate redemption capability under extreme market conditions. If large-scale redemptions occur and underlying assets cannot be quickly liquidated, the transformation logic will be falsified.
The key variables to watch in the next 7 days are the overall liquidity depth of DeFi lending pools and the degree of USDe de-pegging during large redemptions.
#ISM创四年新高，美债收益率反跌 #Palantir营收增93%，盘后涨13% #交易之声：你的经验值得被听到 Fundamental Research Report $NMR / Numeraire (AI/Computing Power) $3.20
To put it simply: Numeraire ($NMR) has a composite score of 52/100, with a rating that emphasizes narrative over execution. Breaking it down into three layers: the company team has cash reserves, the protocol network shows signs of paid usage, and token value capture has been realized.
Project Overview: Numeraire (token $NMR) operates in the AI/computing power sector, focusing on AI modeling for hedge funds. Competitors include FET and TAO. Traditional computing power rental is dominated by giants like AWS and CoreWeave, charging by GPU hours, with A100 monthly rents ranging from $12,000 to $25,000—expensive and high-threshold. On-chain solutions fragment computing power for bidding, allowing suppliers to avoid centralized audits and turn idle GPUs into available supply. Average customer price ranges from $50 to $500/month, requiring settlement in USDC or fiat. This is a narrative-driven sector, with usage dropping 60-80% in bear markets. Positioned as an end-to-end vertical platform.
Product Implementation: The protocol layer is officially operational, with on-chain dashboards showing accumulating protocol fees and evidence of paid usage. The latest version was not found; there were 60 valid commits in the past 90 days.
User Metrics: Monthly active addresses (MAU) and daily active addresses (DAU) are undisclosed; 24h trading volume is $80.00M; TVL not found. Wallet addresses do not equal unique monthly active users; concentration of large addresses may overestimate real user count. Revenue side: user fees undisclosed; supplier income is about 80-90% of user fees (distributed to LPs and nodes); protocol treasury income is $2.00M; token holders have no annualized buyback and burn mechanism. The 24h trading volume represents business flow, not revenue. Company profitability does not equal protocol profitability, and protocol profitability does not equal token holder profitability. Code side: 60 valid commits in 90 days, 25 active contributors; latest version not found. GitHub is grade A evidence and can be directly verified. Investment background: company equity financing can be checked on PitchBook/Crunchbase (grade A); token private and public sales can be verified via whitepaper, release schedule, and on-chain unlocking contracts (grade A); market makers and ecosystem grants are grade B and do not represent long-term holdings by technical VCs; technical integration is grade B based on API/SDK evidence; strategic partnerships and logo walls are grade D. NVIDIA GPU usage does not equal NVIDIA investment; exchange listings do not equal strategic exchange investments.
Token Metrics: Total supply 1,300,000,000; circulating supply 950,000,000 (73.1%); FDV $4.20B; next unlock in 2026-Q4 (adds +3.50% to circulation); no clear annualized buyback and burn. Is buying tokens required to use the product? Partially yes, with moderate value capture (staking/discounts/governance). Comparing peers (using consistent criteria, no cross-sector comparisons): Circulating market cap: Numeraire $3.00B, FET undisclosed, TAO undisclosed. FDV: Numeraire $4.20B, FET undisclosed, TAO undisclosed. Annual revenue: Numeraire $2.00M, FET undisclosed, TAO undisclosed. Monthly active addresses or users: all undisclosed. Data based on public snapshots; missing data supplemented by official or industry sources. Valuation: circulating market cap $3.00B, FDV $4.20B, P/S 1500.0x, FDV divided by revenue 2100.0x. Pessimistic scenario discounts $3.00B by 30-50%, neutral range oscillates, optimistic scenario includes revenue doubling, burn implementation, and enterprise clients, aligning FDV P/S with top peers.
Summary: Fundamentals are solid (score 52/100). Token value capture is realized (buyback/burn/gas). Circulating market cap is relatively expensive compared to fundamentals, reflecting over-optimism; FDV is moderate. Main risks: short-term large unlocks causing price dumps, protocol revenue dropping to zero long-term, token demand relying solely on incentives (usage collapses if incentives stop). Key future indicators: weekly protocol fees, burn amounts, active address retention, TVL/loan balances, GitHub version releases. Information sources are public; logic is self-developed; this does not constitute investment advice. Data deviations over 30% require reassessment.
That's all for now, see you next time.
#FundamentalResearchReport #Crypto #Research #OKXOrbit$BTC $ETH $SNDK From July 27 to August 2, 1,638 BTC at an average price of $63,957, cashing out 104 million, half dividends paid and half repurchased preferred shares. Sounds pretty scary, right? But looking at the data for the first seven months of this year, 174895 BTC bought and 3,620 BTC sold, selling volume less than a fraction of the buy. The ledger looks like this: holding 842138 BTC, average cost $75,419, current price around 63,000, floating loss about 17%, book unrealized loss 10.7 billion But this isn't a cash loss—it's a book loss caused by fair value accounting rules. Over 99% of losses were never sold. They said they'd never sell coins at first, but now they're forced to sell. What's the difference? It's not that beliefs have changed—it's that STRC preferred shares have dropped to 89 yuan with a par value of 100. A 12% dividend can't be skipped. Selling coins is the fastest way to raise funds, so the company shifted from just buying and not selling to active capital management. The core goal isn't to hoard coins, but to bring STRC back to 100. If this price gap isn't fixed for a day, large-scale buying won't bring it back. This will have a negative impact on BTC and short-term sentiment The biggest bulls have started selling. Just that statement is shocking enough, but structurally, the fundamentals haven't changed: 4 billion in cash reserves, 840,000 BTC in position. As long as Bitcoin's price doesn't crash, this system can keep operating. The real question is whether they will continue selling in the future. The company has authorized a maximum reduction limit of 5 billion USD, about 78,000 BTC, which accounts for less than 10% of total holdings. Is the quota large? Actually, it's not large, but the direction...ETH's critical level at 1,848—broke it but then reclaimed it.
Current price 1,863, up 1.1% in 24h. Two days ago on 8/2, there was a wick down to 1,824 breaking 1,848. That day I wrote, "Whether it's a fake breakout or a real breakout depends on the 8/3 open." The answer is out—it was a fake breakout. On 8/3, no US-Iran conflict broke out at the open, Trump canceled the large-scale airstrike and moved to negotiations, and ETH was directly pulled back above 1,848, now holding steady at 1,863. 1,848 turned from resistance back into support.
This fake breakout carries a lot of information. On 8/2, I said "there is buying below 1,824," now confirmed—not retail buyers but institutions stepping in. WEEX data shows the 50-day moving average at 1,783, with price still above it, so the mid-term structure remains intact. Simply put, the wick down to 1,824 hit leveraged positions; spot positions were untouched. This kind of wick breakout followed by a quick recovery actually strengthens support below 1,848—because the market is telling you with real money that there are buyers willing to step in below 1,824.
But don’t rush to turn bullish. The trend direction is still sideways to weak, not a reversal. From 7/27’s 1,973 to now 1,863, it’s dropped 110 dollars in eight days, a 5.6% decline. EMA5/10/20 are tightly clustered between 1,870-1,890, a typical consolidation signal—short-term bulls and bears have roughly equal cost bases, no clear advantage. MACD is still a death cross; the negative bars are shrinking but not positive yet. RSI is 51.97, neutral to slightly weak. These indicators tell me ETH is grinding inside a range, not building a bottom for a rebound.
The resistance above price is clear—1,872 is today’s 24h high, touched briefly then retreated. Above that, 1,890 is the toughest level, where EMA5, EMA10, and EMA20 all converge. Breaking above 1,890 signals bulls; failing to break means continued consolidation. Above 1,890 there’s 1,926 (last week’s high), 1,948 (SAR reversal point), and 1,975 (7/27’s concentrated short zone). Each layer presses down; without breaking one, you can’t see the next.
Support below is 1,848—the just confirmed fake breakout bottom, now the first defense line. Below that, 1,828 is today’s 24h low, then the round number 1,800, 1,783 is the 50-day moving average and mid-term defense, and at the bottom 1,758 is July’s low.
Why didn’t breaking 1,848 on 8/2 cause a crash? The core reason is US-Iran shifted from conflict to talks. Trump canceled the large-scale airstrike on 8/1, and from 8/2-3 moved to negotiations, saying "this is Iran’s last chance," with phase one opening the Strait of Hormuz and phase two denuclearization. Iran verbally denies talks with the US but is actually advancing Strait navigation with Oman. Oil prices plunged—WTI down 5.11% to 80 USD, Brent down 4.73% to 83.77. US stocks rose three days in a row, risk appetite returned. The fear index rose from 17 to 25, still in fear territory but less extreme than 8/2.
But don’t celebrate too early; two things remain uncertain. One is the 65% chance of a rate hike in September, 10-year US Treasury yield at 4.74%, 30-year hitting a 19-year high—oil prices fell, but the previous rise already pushed inflation expectations up; whether rates drop depends on next month’s PCE. The other is the CLARITY Act; Polymarket lowered its passing probability to 31%. Congress recesses on August 10, likely too late to review, and failure of this bill is bearish for crypto.
Regarding positions, here’s my take. For longs near 1,850, 8/2 was the toughest day; now at 1,863 profits have returned, so move stop loss from 1,824 to 1,845 to lock in profits. Take half profits at 1,890; if it breaks, hold for 1,926. Those who bottomed between 1,824-1,837 have the best positions, with 26-39 dollars profit; move stop loss to 1,848, reduce half at 1,890, fully exit at 1,926, or hold to bet on a rebound if talks succeed. If no position, don’t enter at 1,863—the odds aren’t good. Either wait for a pullback to 1,848-1,855 to lightly test longs with stop loss at 1,828, or wait for a breakout above 1,890 and enter on pullback with stop loss at 1,870. For shorts, placing orders at 1,890 has better odds than chasing longs at 1,863; stop loss at 1,905, target 1,855, but keep position under 5%. Heavy positions in a choppy market are suicidal. Leverage 2-3x is enough; ETH’s 24h volatility is only 45 dollars, high leverage betting direction in a choppy market dies fastest.
My own half position at 1,837 on 8/2 that I didn’t close is now alive with 26 dollars profit. Honestly, I should have closed that day; holding on was pure luck—if US-Iran had really fought, 1,837 would have been mid-mountain. Lesson learned: in front of geopolitical black swans, technical supports are just paper.
The key variable ahead remains US-Iran. If talks succeed, ETH will surge to 1,890-1,926 or even 1,948; if talks fail, it will retest 1,848, and breaking 1,828 looks at 1,800. I bet talks will succeed because neither side can afford war—the US military ammo stockpile needs 4 years to replenish, and Iran’s economy can’t hold out. But betting is betting; position sizing must be cautious.
Do you think the dense moving average zone at 1,890 will break this week? I bet it won’t—MACD is still a death cross, no major positive news means no direct breakout. But if US-Iran officially ceasefire and reopen Hormuz, that’s major positive, and 1,900 is a given. Are you planning to short at 1,890 or wait for a breakout to chase longs?
#从降息到加息，联储分歧全公开 $ETH