Orbit Post Sitemap
#Anthropic估算30万亿美元市场，IPO叙事能否兑现？
Anthropic is telling the capital markets what might be the most aggressive growth story in the AI industry to date: a future addressable market size exceeding $30 trillion.
But first, let's clarify a potentially confusing concept—the $30 trillion is not Anthropic's valuation, but the potential market size (TAM) it describes to IPO investors. The current market discussion about the IPO target valuation is around $2 trillion, with the final figure still undecided. (qz.com)
What really catches my attention is not this exaggerated TAM, but that Anthropic's growth rate has become so fast that traditional valuation methods are starting to fail.
The company just completed a $65 billion financing round at the end of May, with a post-money valuation of $965 billion, and disclosed annualized revenue already exceeding $47 billion at that time; the latest reports show that by the end of July, annualized revenue had reached about $65 billion. (anthropic.com)
Even more aggressive are the future expectations.
According to Reuters, Anthropic expects revenue in 2028 to reach $190 billion to $200 billion. This means that if the market is really willing to give it a $2 trillion valuation, essentially it is pricing the AI productivity revolution about two years in advance at roughly 10 times the expected 2028 revenue. (reuters.com)
So I believe the real questions Anthropic's IPO needs to validate are not "Is Claude easy to use?" but three issues:
First, can AI truly transform from an auxiliary tool into the foundational infrastructure of enterprises;
Second, after rapid revenue growth, can computing power costs be diluted by economies of scale;
Third, and most crucially—will model capabilities ultimately form a long-term moat, or will they gradually become commoditized as competition intensifies?
If the first two hold true, and the third also holds, then the valuations that seem crazy today may not be crazy in a few years.
But if model prices continue to fall while capital spending on computing power keeps rising, then no matter how large the $30 trillion TAM is, it does not mean Anthropic can convert enough of that value into free cash flow.
This is also the most interesting aspect of this IPO:
Anthropic's listing is not simply about pricing an AI company, but forcing the entire market to answer for the first time—how much is "intelligence" itself worth in the AI era?
If it ultimately goes public at a valuation close to $2 trillion, will you see it as the starting point of the next super platform, or as a sign that the AI bubble has reached its peak?July PCE data is out, and this data is not particularly friendly to the market.
US July PCE year-on-year is 3.7%, higher than the market expectation of 3.6%.
Core PCE year-on-year is 3.3%, in line with expectations.
It looks like just a 0.1 percentage point difference, but what the market really cares about is not this 0.1%, but:
Inflation has not fully declined in the direction the market hoped for.
The most direct impact is:
The market's expectation for a Federal Reserve rate cut may be suppressed again.
If inflation continues to stay relatively high, the Fed will find it difficult to easily shift to easing.
And once interest rate expectations tilt back toward higher levels, US Treasury yields, the dollar, and valuations of global risk assets will all be affected.
This is especially true for the crypto market.
Because this recent rally has just reignited market sentiment, and funds have started to spread into sectors like Meme, DeFi, AI, and the BTC ecosystem.
At this time, the appearance of inflation data higher than expected instead reminds us:
The market is heating up, but macro liquidity has not simultaneously become more accommodative. $BTC #US expands sanctions on Iran, Strait navigation talks advance
There is an interesting divergence in the current Middle East situation: the US continues to increase economic pressure, but diplomatic signals are showing signs of easing.
The US has recently expanded sanctions on Iran, targeting about 60 individuals, entities, and vessels, but it has not pushed the pressure to the extreme levels the market previously feared; meanwhile, Iran and Oman are advancing negotiations on a temporary shipping corridor through the Strait of Hormuz, including temporary routes, mine clearance, and future strait management mechanisms. (Reuters)
This is also why crude oil has recently seen a noticeable decline. The market is no longer just trading on "sanctions escalation" but is beginning to reprice the probability of the Strait of Hormuz reopening. Brent crude has fallen back to around $86, indicating that some of the previously accumulated geopolitical risk premium is being squeezed out. (The Wall Street Journal)
However, I believe it is still too early to directly trade on a "Middle East resolution."
Latest data shows that actual vessel traffic through the Strait of Hormuz remains significantly below normal levels, with only about 5 bulk commodity ships passing on Tuesday, compared to an average of about 15 over the past 10 days. In other words, diplomatic expectations have moved ahead, but real logistics recovery has not fully caught up. (Reuters)
So what really matters next is not whose rhetoric is tougher, but three practical variables: whether the temporary corridor can truly be implemented, whether the US further relaxes blockades and sanctions, and whether tanker traffic can continue to recover.
If these three variables improve simultaneously, there is room for the war premium in oil prices to continue to decline; conversely, if negotiations break down again, the risk premium that the market has already sold off in advance could quickly return.
The market never truly trades the news itself, but whether the news changes future cash flows and supply-demand structures.
Do you think this round of talks is a genuine starting point for easing, or are both sides trying to gain leverage before the next round of bargaining? $BTC On the surface, this round of the market seems ridiculously lively, with bears repeatedly proven wrong, while bulls seem to be able to buy whatever they want. But those who really pay attention to the details of the market will find that the underlying structure is not so uniform; there is a wide river separating the strong and weak. Have you ever wondered why, despite the same bull market signals, some coins have already flown so far that they disappear, while others remain stuck in circles? Let's look at the numbers first. On October 10, 2025, the market ended the bear market with $246 million in short liquidations, and then opened the bull market with $1.678 billion in long liquidations. By August 19, 2026, short liquidations totaled $273.9 million, while long liquidations were only $24.8 million. This ratio change speaks volumes—bears are accelerating their exit, while bulls haven't yet developed a reckless frenzy. The most obvious thing I've seen in my recent market sentiment is that after multiple bottoms, open interest has started to rise continuously. This pattern isn't supported by a single big bullish candle, but rather by funds quietly turning, accumulating, and increasing holdings. Combined with BTC's 200-day moving average, which is firmly above 69,118, the underlying trend is indeed warm. But I don't want to stop at the conclusion that "the bull market is coming"—that's too lazy. What cares more about the strength differences between sectors is the difference. - The strongest players in this round are still BTC and ETH, serving as "safe havens for funds," with shallow pullbacks and rapid rebounds, clearly indicating institutions are continuously accumulating. - There is serious differentiation among altcoins; only those with authentic narratives and on-chain data can keep up; most others are passively followingUsing 20x leverage to brutally tear open a 200% profit on $UB is definitely not just luck, but a textbook-level volume-price game. The UB market has been extremely dramatic these days, perfectly illustrating what "peak and decline" means.
Carefully dissecting your opening logic, the entry point at 0.135 just hits the critical point where the bullish force is exhausted and the trend is about to reverse. UB previously experienced an almost vertical short squeeze rally, attracting a large amount of follow-up capital. But extremes reverse; when the price deviates too far from the moving average and volume starts to lag, a divergence signal at the top appears. You keenly captured this selling pressure, using high leverage to short with the trend, fully profiting from this technical correction.
Although the current paper profit looks impressive, facing such a highly volatile AI concept coin, you must stay alert at all times. The upcoming market will most likely enter a wide-range consolidation and shakeout phase, where the main funds may repeatedly pull to clean out chips. In terms of operation, it is recommended to withdraw the principal first, let the remaining profit "snowball" inside, and also set stop losses to prevent the bulls from suddenly launching a second short squeeze. Protecting the victory fruit is the key. $BTC $ETH #美国核心PCE持平上月，沃什杰克逊霍尔讲话如何定调？ The Crypto Market Fear and Greed Index has risen to 74, officially entering the greed zone, reflecting a significant recovery in current market risk appetite.
In the short term, the improved sentiment supports BTC and major altcoins, favoring a strong market; however, this value is already high, increasing the risk of blindly chasing highs. If the index continues to surge into the 80–90 range, the market is likely to show signs of overheating.
From the market perspective, Bitcoin maintains high-level oscillation combined with continuous net inflows into ETFs, indicating that this rally is not purely sentiment-driven and the upward trend has a foundation for continuation. Risk signals to watch include: new highs in coin prices but slowing ETF inflows, high funding rates, and rapidly rising open interest in contracts. Such divergences often signal an increased probability of a short-term pullback.
Overall, the short-term bias remains bullish, but the strategy has shifted from bottom-fishing to strictly controlling the risk of chasing highs. Once the index breaks above 80 into the extreme greed zone, it is crucial to guard against profit-taking and leveraged fund liquidations. $BTC $ETH $SNDK #美扩大对伊制裁，海峡复航谈判推进 The early session's two-coin short strategy was another textbook-level prediction
$ETH short in the 2470-2490 range, stop loss at 2520, target at 2430-2400
The market peaked at 2474, precisely hitting our entry range, not even touching the stop loss boundary, then immediately dropped all the way to 2431, exactly hitting the first target level, securing a 40-point profit in one trade
From entry point to defense position, from the direction of the pullback to the target range, every step was calculated precisely. It was clearly indicated that a small-scale pullback adjustment was established, the price deviated from the moving average and needed correction, so the decline was entirely expected; the market was just following our script
Unity of knowledge and action, self-discipline and caution. The strategy is set, execution is in place, and no matter how challenging the market is, it won't stop the path to profit
#美国核心PCE持平上月，沃什杰克逊霍尔讲话如何定调？ 8.26 Gold Midday Review
Gold has fallen from a high of 4673 to around 4598, with a single-day pullback of over $50, significantly giving back previous gains.
Driven by profit-taking and hawkish Federal Reserve officials, short-term bears dominate, with hourly charts showing consecutive declines.
Currently, avoid blindly bottom-fishing; a rebound between 4625-4645 is a good range to set up short positions, targeting 4595-4575.
Note:
The above analysis is the personal view of Mu Yao. The market changes rapidly, and the content is for reference only and does not constitute any investment advice!
$XAU 📊 $NEAR Contract Liquidation Express (August 26)
Long positions went from extreme crushing to sustained control, with leverage dropping from 1935x in an avalanche to a moderate recovery. The 24-hour cumulative liquidation exceeded $890,000, with a concentration of only 60%, showing a V-shaped reversal...
Time Total Liquidation Long Liquidation Short Liquidation
1 hour $200,400 $200,300 $103.49
4 hours $264,700 $264,400 $376.40
12 hours $352,700 $338,700 $13,900
24 hours $899,900 $877,000 $22,900
In 1 hour, longs crushed with an extreme 1935x leverage, amounting to $200,300, showing extreme control; at 4 hours, leverage slightly dropped to 702x, amount rising to $264,400; at 12 hours, it sharply fell to 24x, amount rising to $338,700; at 24 hours, it rebounded to 38x, with liquidation of $877,000 for longs versus $22,900 for shorts, totaling $899,900. The 12-hour liquidation accounts for 60% of the 24-hour total, indicating a moderately high concentration. Long leverage dropped from 702x to 24x then rebounded to 38x, forming a V-shaped reversal. Although the short squeeze momentum has significantly retreated from extreme values, it remains in a strong range overall. Leverage is recommended to be compressed to within 3x; do not blindly chase longs.
🔥 Market Indicator | August 26
Today's three hot topics point to the same theme: The Fed's favored inflation indicator remains steady, Bitcoin oscillates after knocking on the $80,000 door amid a "devaluation trade," and the U.S. economic "war" on Iran continues.
📊 Core PCE Steady Month-on-Month: Inflation Stickiness Unresolved, Watch for Waller's Jackson Hole Speech
On August 26, the U.S. Commerce Department announced July's core PCE price index year-on-year at 3.3%, unchanged from last month, meeting market expectations; month-on-month rose 0.2%, accelerating from June's 0.1%. The PCE price index year-on-year was 3.7%, also steady. Meanwhile, inflation-adjusted consumer spending in July was flat month-on-month, failing to continue the strong growth momentum from May and June.
Inflation stickiness persists while consumption momentum weakens—this data puts the Fed's September rate decision in a dilemma.
The bigger focus is this week: Fed Chair Waller will deliver his first keynote speech since taking office at the Jackson Hole Global Central Bank Symposium at 10 PM Beijing time on August 28. Wall Street views this as the most critical window for Waller to restore Fed credibility. The market expects Waller may reiterate inflation risks and keep rate hike options open to rebuild trust. Against the backdrop of three dissenting votes at the July FOMC and public internal divisions, Waller's speech will be a key indicator for September's rate hike decision.
₿ BTC Oscillates After Breaking $80,000: After Short Squeeze, the Real Test Begins
Bitcoin surged to $81,237 on Monday, a three-month high, rising over 20% in the past week. However, it failed to hold above that level and retreated to around $79,000 for consolidation.
This rally was driven by three forces: the U.S. Treasury expanding long-term bond repurchase scale causing dollar weakness and reigniting the "devaluation trade"; continuous net inflows into spot Bitcoin ETFs; and large-scale short liquidations.
Analysts point out this rally is mainly driven by short squeezes. Whether Bitcoin can hold above $80,000 depends on whether spot buying can take over short covering. A successful break above the $83,000 resistance could open the way to $90,000; failure to hold may lead to a deep correction.
🚢 U.S. Expands Sanctions on Iran: From Military Strikes to "Economic War"
On August 24, U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen announced an expansion of economic sanctions on Iran to five sectors: aviation, digital assets, gold, shipping, and technology. Yellen called this move the "economic D-Day."
Meanwhile, the situation in the Strait of Hormuz shows subtle changes. Iran and Oman issued a joint statement proposing to establish a mutually agreed safe maritime corridor in the Strait of Hormuz. However, the strait remains closed, and the temporary agreement does not mean full resumption of navigation. Iran has previously stated that if the U.S. continues its economic war, no oil will be exported through the Strait of Hormuz.
💎 Summary
Three events paint the same picture: Core PCE steady at 3.3% proves inflation stickiness remains unresolved; Waller's Jackson Hole speech will be the key indicator for September's rate hike decision; Bitcoin retreated after briefly knocking on $80,000, and whether the short squeeze-driven rally can turn into sustained buying remains uncertain; the U.S. shifts from military strikes to "economic war" on Iran, with progress in Strait of Hormuz navigation talks but far from finalized. $NEAR contract longs rebounded from a 702x avalanche to 38x, with cumulative liquidation of $899,900 and 60% concentration. Although short squeeze momentum has significantly retreated from extreme values, it remains in a strong range. As inflation data, central bank speeches, and geopolitical games converge in the same time window—the market awaits Waller's direction. #美国核心PCE持平上月，沃什杰克逊霍尔讲话如何定调？
#BTC突破80000美元，能否站稳新关口
#财报观察员：英伟达领衔，AI回报进入验证期 Aave V4 in the last two weeks:
Weekly users: Up ~50x, now averaging 52K
User deposits: Up by $395M (2x)
Active loans: Up by $75M (~70%)
What's driving it?
@Aave is now powering EtherFi Cash, the fastest growing neobank onchain.
The integration is extremely valuable for both sides.
@ether_fi inherits audited, battle-tested infrastructure and governance machinery while preserving the Cash product surface above it (User Safes, Credit/Debit modes, settlement).
#DailyOrbit One question:
If a coin later rises by 100% to 200%,
did the market leave any signals before it truly took off?
Recently, I pulled records from the past week to create a leaderboard.
The results are quite interesting:
The highest single instance showed a +205.9% increase after the first abnormal movement.
All of the TOP 7 have already exceeded +120% in their historical highest gains.
Of course, it's easy to see the gains in hindsight.
The truly valuable question is:
Could these data have been detected in advance at that time?
So now I don't focus much on "predicting the next 100x coin," but instead continuously record:
Price anomalies
Volume changes
OI changes
Time of first abnormal movement
Subsequent performance after the abnormal movement
The more data accumulated, the more interesting this becomes.
I will continue updating this leaderboard.
No predictions, just recording the traces left by the market.
$ONG $TRUMP $HEMI $ENA After SOL broke $103, it retraced to $96: Liquid Staking surges +32%, price vs TVL starts to diverge
$SOL retraced from the $103 high to $97, down 4.4% in 24h, failing to retake $100 on the second attempt. Still up 13.6% over the week, and 18% over 90 days. Today's story is not about the price.
1. Liquid Staking surges. TVL at $5.74B, with Liquid Staking segment up over 30% in 7 days, Sanctum LST up 32.1% in a week. This is not retail chasing prices; institutions are deploying interest-bearing SOL exposure via LST — both AI infrastructure narratives and RWA entry require it.
2. Spot market is also active but shows divergence. SOL ETF has net inflows for 5 consecutive days, the largest this month; however, JTO is down 4.2% today — the governance token of the largest LST protocol is being sold while underlying TVL is soaring. Smart money is locking in yields, not speculating.
3. Price perspective. The $100-104 resistance band was not broken twice, RSI at 79 close to overbought, still 62% below the yearly high of $253. Overall, the underlying capital conditions are improving, but the price has already priced in gains prematurely; waiting for a pullback to $90-92 for a more stable reassessment.$BTC
This wave of BTC has already left behind a large group of people waiting for a pullback.
In the past few days, BTC has surged from over 60,000 to nearly 80,000, with the market seeing tens of billions of dollars worth of short liquidations; meanwhile, ETF funds have continued to flow back in.
But I actually feel it’s getting harder to trade now.
Because the previous rise had two strong fuels:
Short squeeze + ETF buying.
Now that the shorts have been largely wiped out, whether it can continue to rise depends on whether new spot funds are willing to take over.
#美国核心PCE持平上月，沃什杰克逊霍尔讲话如何定调？ Understand the problems and solutions:
Tokenizing real world assets and stocks does NOT make them censorship resistant it does NOT place them above legal systems or protect against nation state attacks and it does NOT solve for issuer trust.
This is not what tokenizing solves for.
What it DOES do is enable fast movement of assets in a much more frictionless manner than the traditional system. It DOES solve for the ledger.
#DailyOrbit $DOGE/USDT: 264M USDT in 24 hours, 6% swing with -5% net result. Only 21% are green, but the median position is -1.65%. Shorts are open but not aggressive.
Which force will break the game first — money or inertia? $BTC +37% from the lows
$ETH +60%
The rally has delivered, but the structure is starting to look stretched.
What fueled it? • US Treasury buybacks
• Progress on crypto legislation
• Softer SEC positioning
But there’s a key difference: most of these are sentiment/catalyst drivers not fresh liquidity
That makes the current move harder to sustain
I’m not calling the top — saying the risk/reward is changing.
At these levels, confirmation matters more than chasing momentum.
#DailyOrbit $BTC BTC Pulls Back to 77,700: Sell the Fact?
CPI data landed, in line with expectations. But BTC rallied to 81,200 then reversed to 77,700 – classic "buy the rumor, sell the fact."
The market structure has shifted. CPI-BTC correlation is fading – money flow now follows price momentum more than macro prints. ETFs posted 7 straight days of net inflows ($2.57B), which is solid support, but short-term profit-taking is weighing.
Takeaway:
77K is the bull's last standBitcoin cleared leverage at the 74,600 level. Now, at this position, consider gradually selling spot. In the next 3 to 4 months, it is highly likely to remain a wide-range oscillation market. The liquidity released by the US is similar to China's structural interest rate cuts in previous years. Gold and Bitcoin, which are sensitive to liquidity, have rebounded, but other tech assets are performing poorly. The final phase of structural rate cuts often results in a complete suppression, hurting businesses and individual residents, while government departments remain comfortable.$80K–$83K = Critical HTF Supply Zone. Rejection Here Risks A Deviation + Distribution Phase, With Bullish Structure Losing Confirmation.
HTF Close > $83K = Structural Breakout. Until Then, Upside Remains Vulnerable To A Liquidity Sweep And Deeper Retracement.
$BTC A model that scammed a bunch of people five years ago has doubled again after just changing its name
This afternoon while watching the market, I saw a number: on Robinhood chain, a protocol called NetNet Capital, its token NET briefly surged past $70 million in market cap, hitting a new all-time high, doubling in 24 hours with just over 100% gain. It has slightly pulled back now, reporting $66.48 million.
Looking at this gain alone, it’s not really surprising in today’s meme-fueled market frenzy. What really made me stop was one line in its mechanism introduction: the architecture is inspired by OlympusDAO v1.
Those words OlympusDAO should be familiar to anyone who played the DeFi wave in 2021. Back then, it went viral with the 3,3 game theory narrative and annual yields often in the thousands, with token price peaking over a thousand dollars and market cap reaching tens of billions. But we all know how it ended: the token price dropped over 90%, DeFi 2.0 went from buzzword to cautionary tale, and many who kept reinvesting with rebase and buying more as prices rose ended up losing even their principal.
Now this model is back. NET’s approach is that the treasury backs the token’s value with USDG stablecoins, and the smart contract hardcodes a rule that each NET must correspond to at least 1 USDG of risk-free value. If minting exceeds the treasury’s actual holdings, the transaction will be rolled back immediately.
This rule is indeed more rigorous than the barebones version back then. OHM’s treasury backing was more of a narrative trust, relying on the community’s belief that the treasury could hold up; this time it’s a hard constraint written into the contract, preventing over-minting on-chain. It sounds like the biggest pitfall of the old model has been plugged.
But I’m not sure this changes much. 1 USDG is the floor price, but NET’s current price is still far above that floor. What supports that gap? The answer is still new money coming in, the logic is essentially the same as five years ago. The contract can guarantee you won’t lose below zero, but it can’t guarantee you won’t catch the falling knife.
What’s more worth pondering is that this isn’t a coincidence for a single project. DTF, another OHM concept token, has a market cap of only $6 million but rose 107% in one day, also following the upward trend. A concept once sentenced to death now has several shells rising simultaneously on the same day, indicating someone is consciously flipping this old ledger.
I’ve always thought the most interesting thing about this space is right here. The same model, the first time it appears it’s called innovation; after it crashes it’s called a Ponzi; a few years later it reappears on a different chain with a new name, and some call it innovation again. That painful memory in between seems to have been collectively erased.
What do you think? Are the people chasing this round the same ones who chased OHM five years ago? Or is it precisely because they’re not the same people that this keeps happening over and over again? $BTC BTC falls back to 77700: Why did the CPI boost fail?
The CPI year-on-year at 3.4% met expectations, but BTC surged to 81200 before falling back to 77700 and fluctuating. The old relationship has broken — in the past three CPI releases, BTC volatility did not exceed 1%, and ETF buying is driven more by momentum than data.
Brief commentary:
83K is resistance; only a breakthrough can lead to a bull run; if 77K doesn't hold, look to 75K. ETFs have had net inflows exceeding 3 billion for 7 consecutive days to support the price, but profit-taking pressure remains. Wait for direction, don't guess.After Bitcoin broke through $80,000, market sentiment did become lively for a while, but from a calm perspective, the foundation of this rally is not as smooth as the price curve. A fact that's easy to overlook is that real external incremental funds haven't flowed in massively; currently, it's mostly existing funds moving between different sectors. In other words, this isn't a universal bull market, but rather fierce battles among existing funds in a limited pool, and competition between sectors is only getting fiercer. Many friends who participate in both the US and crypto markets have reported that cross-market operations are becoming more difficult, with funds trapped in US stocks and unable to move, which also indirectly confirms that current liquidity is not as abundant as imagined. Bitcoin's ability to hold this new level largely relies on institutional funds continuously allocating in batches through spot channels, essentially using real money to support the bottom zone. But the problem is that the subsequent momentum for an upward breakout does not come from the crypto market itself, but depends on external macro data and the state of dollar liquidity. If the external environment does not send more positive signals, Bitcoin's willingness and momentum to actively push up are actually weakening, and the price is more likely to fluctuate repeatedly at the current level, digesting chips. In stark contrast to Bitcoin is Ethereum. Many people habitually believe that as long as Bitcoin holds its ground, Ethereum will eventually catch up, but the real market logic is far from that simple. In an environment where existing funds compete, the total supply is fixed. When risk aversion heats up and funds habitually concentrate on Bitcoin, Ethereum actually bears the pressure of capital being withdrawnBernstein Bullish on Bitcoin at $300,000 but Cuts Target Price for Coin-Hoarding Stock
This afternoon, a research report from Bernstein stunned many. The firm painted a very long-term blueprint for Bitcoin, predicting it could surge to a historic high of $150,000 by mid-2027 and peak around $300,000 in this cycle by 2029. Their reasoning is that what they see as a currency devaluation trade is emerging, with money flowing into assets that can resist devaluation.
The so-called currency devaluation trade refers to the gradual dilution of fiat purchasing power due to fiscal and monetary easing worldwide, prompting capital to seek hard assets that can preserve value. Bernstein believes this trend is just beginning.
However, in the same report, Bernstein cut the target price for their favorite coin-hoarding concept stock, Strategy. They maintained an outperform rating but slashed the target price from $450 to $350, a $100 cut in one go. The reason was straightforward: Strategy is accelerating stock issuance to raise funds, causing rapid equity dilution that dilutes future gains.
Interestingly, Bernstein is not the only institution bullish on crypto these days. Jiang Zhuoer said the probability of Bitcoin falling below its starting point is very low, and Mizuho also said this rebound is of higher quality than previous ones. But no one else has put both bullish and bearish views in the same report like Bernstein did.
This is quite intriguing. On one hand, they see Bitcoin reaching $300,000; on the other, they cut the target price for the most aggressive coin-hoarding company. Those bullish on Bitcoin are not necessarily bullish on the company that issues stock to buy Bitcoin.
Simply put, Bernstein is betting on Bitcoin itself, not Strategy’s stock. Strategy’s logic is to exchange stock for coins and use coins to boost stock price—the faster the flywheel spins, the more new shares are issued. When Bitcoin’s rise slows, the dilution effect starts to outweigh asset appreciation. This time, the institution accounted for this at the equity level.
For ordinary people, there is a pitfall easily overlooked here. You might think buying coin-hoarding stocks is an indirect way to hold coins, but in reality, you are buying a company that must keep issuing shares. When the coin price rises, the total shares also increase, so the coins per share may not rise as much. Bernstein’s cut in target price essentially clears this accounting for the market.
What’s more subtle is the timing. This report was released just as Bitcoin had just climbed back above $80,000 and market sentiment was dropping from the year’s high on the Fear & Greed Index. The institution dares to give a 30-year outlook but discounts the stock returns for the next few years.
So what we should think about is not whether $300,000 will come, but whether the asset in our hands is Bitcoin itself or a diluted proxy. Even though both are called crypto assets, the underlying cash flow and structure can be vastly different. The most important distinction to make in this market is probably this.People often say Bitcoin will replace gold, but now they have combined.
Today, a new ETF quietly launched in Hong Kong, named MicroBit Bitcoin and Gold Value ETF. Its uniqueness lies in being Hong Kong's first fund that provides investors exposure to both Bitcoin and gold simultaneously; buying one share includes both.
This is quite interesting. In recent years, there has been ongoing debate in the community about whether Bitcoin is truly digital gold and if it can replace gold as a new safe-haven asset. Supporters on both sides have argued for years, but Hong Kong has directly packaged these two rivals into one product. Previously, you had to choose between gold and Bitcoin, but now someone has combined them for you.
What’s even more intriguing is the timing. Bitcoin has just bounced from over $60,000 back up to around $80,000, and market sentiment, measured by the fear and greed index, has climbed to a new high this year. Launching a product that ties Bitcoin and gold together at this moment clearly isn’t about short-term price swings, but about productizing a long-term demand for people who want to hold both crypto and gold but are too lazy to open and manage separate accounts.
For ordinary investors, the significance of this ETF isn’t about multiples but accessibility. Hong Kong’s regulatory pathway allows those unfamiliar with on-chain operations but wanting to allocate to these assets to do so through familiar brokerage accounts, without managing wallets, private keys, or cold and hot storage themselves. The trade-off is accepting fund-level management fees, and it doesn’t actually move the coins into your own wallet.
What’s truly worth pondering is the signal. Hong Kong’s moves in crypto over the past two years have been bigger than many expected—from spot ETFs to stablecoin regulations, and now this composite product—the path is becoming clearer. When Bitcoin and gold are placed into the same regulated basket, it shows that traditional finance’s acceptance of these assets has reached the stage of portfolio allocation, not just testing the waters.
So the question arises: when holding crypto and storing gold become two options within the same fund, will you still insist on choosing just one?MetaMask quietly earns millions monthly on others' turf
Many still think of MetaMask as just that old wallet used for storing coins and signing, believing it doesn't touch your money. But a newly released set of data has torn this notion apart.
According to HyperTracker monitoring, in the past 30 days, the top three earners in the Hyperliquid ecosystem's Builder income rankings are all familiar wallet brands. MetaMask ranks first with about $1.32 million, Phantom follows closely with about $1.26 million, and Trust Wallet is third with about $900,000. Further down the list, Invo earned about $660,000, fomo about $430,000, and Rabby about $230,000, all making the list. Just the top two wallets alone took over $1.2 million in fees from Hyperliquid's transaction flow in one month.
The so-called Builder Code is basically the wallet, trading front-end, or other entry points that can tag a source when a user places an order, then take a proportional cut of the transaction fee. Previously, this money was mostly earned by centralized exchanges, but now the chain has reversed, and wallets themselves have become rent collectors.
In the past, people thought wallets and exchanges were two separate paths. Wallets manage assets, exchanges handle trades, each earning their own. But with on-chain perpetuals moving trading onto the chain, wallets just need to connect an interface to run brokerage business at home. Users don’t switch apps, but the money flows through the wallet’s channel.
What’s even more intriguing is the user experience. When you click swap in MetaMask or make a perpetual trade in Phantom, you might not even realize that the fee for your trade is quietly flowing back into the wallet company’s pocket. The wallet is no longer the bystander that doesn’t touch your money; it has become the invisible broker for every one of your trades.
Behind this is a new narrative taking shape. When on-chain perpetual trading volume catches up to or even partially surpasses some secondary exchanges, the value of wallets as traffic entry points is being revalued. MetaMask and Phantom’s trading volumes in the past 30 days reached $1.4 billion and $2.29 billion respectively, which is no small matter. Whoever controls the user’s first app open holds the key to profit sharing.
But problems arise as well. As wallets increasingly resemble exchanges, can they still tell the story of pure decentralization and non-custodial service? Users entrust assets to wallets, but wallets start making money by guiding trades. The balance of motivation is quietly tipping.
Which wallet will be the next to be fed by the Builder mechanism? And every time we click the trade button, who exactly are we paying taxes to?Australia's second-largest pension fund is quietly cutting U.S. Treasury holdings
Australia's second-largest pension fund has made some interesting moves recently. This fund, managing about 370 billion AUD, equivalent to over 260 billion USD in assets, has quietly been increasing its position in the Japanese yen over the past six months, specifically when the yen approached 160 against the U.S. dollar. At the same time, it reduced its exposure to U.S. Treasuries by about 0.5 percentage points. This fund is called the Australian Retirement Trust, abbreviated as ART, and it is the second-largest pension fund in Australia by size.
A pension fund that should be the most conservative is actually moving against the trend when U.S. dollar assets are most sought after. The manager's logic sounds straightforward: the market may have overestimated the suppressive effect of energy prices on the yen while underestimating the possibility of a Bank of Japan rate hike. Currently, interest rate swaps show about an 80% chance of a rate hike by the Bank of Japan in September, and a Reuters survey indicates that 57% of economists expect rates to rise to 1.25% in September. Buying the yen when everyone thinks it’s doomed is itself a signal.
More striking is its view on U.S. Treasuries. The fund is currently underweight U.S. Treasuries, listing several reasons: U.S. inflation remains above target, the economy still shows resilience, and the AI investment boom is competing with the government for capital. It even expects the 30-year U.S. Treasury yield to possibly surge to 5.5%. In other words, it not only wants to avoid increasing exposure to U.S. Treasuries but is also betting that long-term yields will continue to rise.
This has a closer relationship to the crypto space than it appears on the surface. The cheap yen that has supported risk assets over the past year was largely sustained by carry trades. Once the Bank of Japan actually hikes rates, the unwinding of yen short positions will be like last August, dismantling the most crowded leveraged positions globally, with the crypto market often taking the first hit. A player managing over 200 billion USD starting to position ahead of this scenario is very telling.
We often say there’s nowhere to go for U.S. dollar assets, but the largest pool of real money is quietly preparing an alternative. When consensus is strongest, that’s often when prices are most expensive in hindsight. Where the money flows matters more than who shouts the loudest. By the time everyone realizes it, the price levels will have already changed.The whale who lost tens of millions by buying high and selling low is back after half a year
That mysterious trader who lost about $12 million by buying high and selling low on Ethereum half a year ago made a move again last night, and this time it was a heavy position with no hesitation.
On-chain data monitoring shows that address 0xD81a re-entered the market after nearly six months of silence, dumping over $5.3 million in one go to buy back 2,165 Ethereum at an average cost of around $2,463. The most ironic part is this: the last time he cut losses was by selling Ethereum at around $2,452, just $11 less, meaning he bought back the same batch at a higher price, effectively paying the market tuition twice.
In the community, this kind of operation is called getting slapped on both sides, but clearly, this is not the first time he’s done this. Some dug up earlier records showing that in several rounds, he almost always bought at relatively high points and sold at relatively low points, turning swing trading into a counterproductive contribution to the market. Ordinary people would hide and lick their wounds after a loss, but he, after six months of silence, didn’t test the waters with a small position; instead, he directly increased his position to an even heavier one, as if challenging himself.
So why did he choose to come back now? An unavoidable background is that Bitcoin has recently climbed back above $80,000, and spot ETFs have seen net inflows for seven consecutive days, with over $300 million flowing in just yesterday, clearly igniting market sentiment. Although the Fear and Greed Index fell from 74 to 65, it still remains in the greed zone, an atmosphere that easily tempts those who have suffered losses before to get back in, thinking this time they will get it right.
There is also a more subtle explanation. He might not care about that $10 price difference at all but is convinced of the mid-to-long-term direction and is willing to replenish his position at a higher cost. After all, as Ethereum climbed from $62,000 to $80,000, many institutions and whales who had exited quietly started to buy back, and he may not be the last one to sober up.
But let’s be clear. Everything on-chain is transparent; who is doing what is obvious, but understanding it doesn’t mean you can copy it correctly. An address that lost tens of millions buying again is neither bullish nor bearish; it’s just another vivid example reminding you not to follow others blindly. The real question is, when you see an address building a large position, are you buying along with it, or are you asking why it’s buying? The answers to these two questions are worlds apart.$6.4 Billion Options Expiry: Bitcoin at 80K Hanging by a Thread
This Friday at 4 PM Beijing time, about 81,700 Bitcoin options will expire on Deribit, with a notional value close to $6.44 billion. This figure represents one of the largest single-week expiries in recent times, and the most critical strike prices are right at the $75,000 and $80,000 levels.
It's a bit ironic. Just last week, Bitcoin was hovering around $62,000, then surged to $80,000 within a week, rising nearly 30%. This surge pushed a large number of previously out-of-the-money call options directly into the money. Market makers suddenly found themselves holding a large amount of positions that needed hedging, and the pressure quickly mounted.
The current market structure is very delicate. There are about 44,600 call options and 37,100 put options, with a Put/Call ratio of only 0.83, indicating an overall bullish bias. But bullish doesn't mean stable. What really keeps traders awake at night is the invisible pull as expiration approaches.
This expiry is closely watched because Deribit alone accounts for the majority of global Bitcoin options trading. Every large expiry is a covert battle between market makers and institutions. Retail investors only see the candlestick movements, but behind the scenes, it's a repricing of contracts worth tens of billions of dollars.
Options within 5% of the current price have a notional value exceeding $500 million. Once these contracts enter the expiry window, market makers hedge their risks by repeatedly buying and selling spot near key strike prices, resulting in the price being pinned around integer levels like 80,000. This is known in the industry as the Gamma pinning effect.
The problem is, once the pin breaks, the reaction can be just as dramatic. If the 80,000 level is effectively breached, the suppressed gamma will accelerate in that direction, causing volatility to spike instantly. Bitcoin is currently hovering around 78,800, down about 2% in 24 hours, having just touched 80,000 before retreating.
Retail investors are often most prone to getting caught up at this time. The Fear and Greed Index just dropped from 74 to 65, still in the greed zone, indicating sentiment hasn't truly cooled. On one side is a record options expiry, on the other is ongoing frenzy—this combination is prone to sharp, spike-like moves.
So what should we be thinking? After this $6.4 billion expiry, will the market remain pinned at 80,000, or will it tear open a gap? The hedging actions of big money are invisible to ordinary people, but the price will speak for them.
At 4 PM this Friday, the market is unlikely to be calm. Even if you don't trade options, spot volatility cannot avoid this expiry.What Wall Street fears is not who wins, but that period when no one admits defeat.
The countdown is exactly ten weeks. In the general congressional vote, the Democrats lead by about six percentage points. Once this number is out, the first to get nervous is not Washington, but the trading desks on Wall Street.
What everyone is really calculating is not who wins, but whether Congress will become a place that blocks everything after the win. If the Democrats take back Congress, with the White House and legislature divided, major bills will enter a long tug-of-war and nothing will move forward. It sounds like political news, but for those of us who live by liquidity, this is price.
Raymond James analyst Ed Mills said something quite key. Most of the market volatility in the past two years was not caused by legislation, but by executive actions. In other words, a legislative deadlock does not mean calm. The real possibility is the opposite: once the White House is blocked by Congress, it tends to push things through executive orders, especially tariffs. The more indirect the means, the harder the pace is to predict, and uncertainty actually increases.
Then there is the more troublesome issue, the debt ceiling. The market generally expects the U.S. government to hit the approximately $41.1 trillion limit around mid-2027. TD Securities puts it bluntly: if the Democrats control Congress, the debt ceiling becomes a card to force Republicans to concede on other policies. If it comes to a deadlock, U.S. Treasury yields will be pushed up, volatility will increase, and as the so-called default trigger date approaches, short-term Treasuries will be more easily sold off.
The assets we hold, frankly, are on the end driven by risk-free rates and liquidity. When yields rise, risky assets have never had an independent rally.
Finally, there is the most difficult scenario to handle. The election result is not that someone loses, but that no one admits defeat. Counting drags on, lawsuits continue, and the result is delayed. The analysis describes a scene of election chaos replayed, risk aversion rising, and volatility increasing. What Wall Street wants most now is not a win by a particular party, but a clear, predictable result that can be modeled.
Our days here continue as usual, with Bitcoin grinding around 78,000, sentiment indicators hanging high, and debates on-chain about who is adding positions and who is exiting. But these short-term games must be viewed on this longer timeline.
So the question is left to you. Do you think the real impact on the market ten weeks from now will be the election result itself, or that period when no one admits defeat?A round of rebound has lifted the market sentiment quickly. Many people, seeing BTC surge again, are convinced that the bear market is completely over and the super cycle has officially begun. But CZ, in his latest public sharing, poured a bucket of cold water: the super cycle has not arrived, and the market is still operating in the bear market phase of the four-year halving cycle. Many remember his early-year expectations for the super cycle. At that time, the market was full of hope, expecting that U.S. policy dividends and ETF capital inflows could break Bitcoin's long-standing four-year cycle and usher in a new trend beyond the old cycle. However, as the market stands now, he has revised his judgment: the policy environment is indeed the best phase in his twelve years in the industry, regulation is becoming clearer, institutional funds continue to be present, and the long-term fundamentals of the industry have not collapsed, but macro benefits do not mean the short-term bear market is directly over. This is also the most contradictory aspect of the current market. On one hand, large bullish candles appear from time to time, BTC rebounds sharply, altcoins rally in turn, liquidation data repeatedly occurs, the profit-making effect briefly returns, and public opinion shouts everywhere that the bull market has restarted; on the other hand, the historical trajectory of the four-year cycle still holds, the AI sector continues to divert hot money from the market, incremental retail investors have not entered on a large scale, the volume of each rally gradually declines, and the rebound is more of a repair trend of stock funds' game. CZ's judgment is worth careful consideration: a bear market does not mean the market only declines steadily; within a bear market, there can also be rebounds of astonishing magnitude. Historically, every major bear market has seen more than one surge that made people mistakenly think the bull market was back. Many traders, precisely, areHere is what is currently happening behind the $BTC candlestick chart……
The price is oscillating near the weekly VWAP, with most of the selling pressure coming from the perpetual contracts side, while the spot market has yet to confirm this weakness!
The initial downward move was mainly driven by long liquidations/profit-taking. When the price hit the lows, newly opened shorts started aggressively building positions but were quickly absorbed and trapped, which helped fuel a rapid rebound.
So far, sellers are clearly fighting for control, but the pressure they exert is disproportionate to actual downward continuation, with very limited downside space gained.
Conclusion: As long as the spot market remains resilient and the price stabilizes near the weekly VWAP, the selling pressure dominated by perpetual contracts is vulnerable to further short squeezes. For the bearish scenario to strengthen, I would like to see the spot market join the selling, with the price gaining genuine acceptance below the VWAP.
Until then, this looks more like a battle for positioning rather than clear bearish control.
It's currently hard to get a clear read! So for me, the position remains unchanged: do nothing. Short sellers have withdrawn for nine consecutive days, so why are Bitcoin bulls standing still?
On-chain data presents a somewhat counterintuitive picture. Since August 17, Bitcoin's short positions have been continuously decreasing, and as of today, they have been reduced for nearly ten consecutive days. On the other hand, long positions have barely moved since August 23, remaining flat. The market appears lukewarm on the surface, but beneath it, some are quietly stepping back. This divergence itself is worth paying close attention to.
Looking over a longer timeframe, the short sellers' retreat began on August 17, about a week earlier than the bulls' stagnation. In other words, those exiting the market are more eager than those wanting to enter. The continuous closing of short positions means those betting on a decline are gradually admitting their mistake and leaving. This retreat is not just noise for a day or two; it is a directional move lasting ten consecutive days.
Meanwhile, the bulls remain inactive, indicating that although spot demand is supporting the market, leveraged funds are not yet ready to charge. This tug-of-war—one side retreating, the other waiting—is actually more interesting than a straight rally. On-chain participants interpret this as the market waiting for a clear signal rather than blindly chasing a rally. Spot support without leveraged movement often signals a transition from hesitation to confirmation in the market.
According to the framework analysts previously provided, for Bitcoin to truly start a full-fledged rally, three conditions must be met: first, a whale on Hyperliquid turns bullish; second, a whale on Bitfinex completes building their BTC long position; third, the negative premiums on the Korean premium (kimchi premium) and Coinbase premium completely disappear. Looking back now, the second and third conditions have quietly been fulfilled. This framework has been repeatedly reviewed within the community, and the premium turning positive indicates that selling pressure from retail investors in Korea and the U.S. has been cleared.
The large Bitfinex whale, closely watched by the community for a long time, has already finished building their long position, and the negative kimchi and Coinbase premiums have vanished. In other words, the only missing piece now is the Hyperliquid whale turning bullish. Hyperliquid has been the main battlefield for perpetual contracts in recent years, and whale flows there serve as a sentiment thermometer. Once this signal lights up, many believe it will catalyze the next Bitcoin rally. If this whale does not turn bullish, the market will likely continue to grind sideways, with no one fooling anyone. But once it moves, leveraged funds usually follow faster than anyone else.
Interestingly, this structure makes the current market appear restrained. Bulls are not blindly adding positions, shorts are retreating, and the price is moving in a neutral range rather than a straight surge. Compared to the leveraged-driven rallies from a few months ago, this time the framework looks more stable. Volume has not expanded, indicating no new money is rushing in.
So the real question lies with the Hyperliquid whale. Whether they continue to watch or turn bullish at any moment, the market is watching closely. What retail investors can probably do is clearly observe who is moving and who is waiting in this tug-of-war, rather than rushing to take sides. Whether the next big green candle will be ignited by this whale remains to be seen in the coming days. The true direction is never decided by retail noise but by the next move of these whales.$XRP The selling pressure at 1.3725 in this wave seems a bit deliberate, the market volume hasn't kept up, it's purely the main force manipulating the K-line. The signs of large on-chain orders retreating are quite obvious, short-term sentiment looks hot, but funds are actually sneaking away. I won't chase longs at this position; instead, I'll pay attention to the risk of a pullback. Whether it can hold around 1.35 is the key. Don't be misled by the surface gains, this is a common shakeout script. Do you think this wave is a bull trap or a real correction? Share your order positions in the comments below.👇👇👇Core PCE remains flat, how will Waller set the tone at Jackson Hole?
I believe this PCE report does not give Waller a reason to "immediately turn dovish," but it is also insufficient for him to directly set a September rate hike as the baseline scenario.
July core PCE rose 0.2% month-over-month, still 3.3% year-over-year; overall PCE year-over-year is 3.7%. In other words, the monthly growth rate has not further deteriorated, but it is still far from the Fed's 2% target. Meanwhile, July personal income grew 0.4%, consumption grew 0.2%, and the economy has not shown obvious signs of slowing down. 
So the most comfortable statement for Waller now is actually:
"Inflation is still too high, so we cannot relax easily; but as long as inflation continues to slowly decline, there is no need to raise rates immediately."
This fits the current environment better than simply being "hawkish" or "dovish."
Why is this PCE report actually more favorable to Waller?
Because it leaves room for both sides.
The hawks can say:
Core PCE at 3.3% is clearly above 2%, inflation remains sticky.
Moreover, Boston Fed President Collins has explicitly stated that if future data does not prove inflation is continuously declining, the Fed may need to raise rates as soon as possible. 
The more dovish side can also say:
Core PCE monthly is only 0.2%, it has not accelerated again, and inflation at least shows no signs of getting out of control.
So Waller has no need to directly announce at Jackson Hole:
"A rate hike in September is certain."
I am more inclined to think Waller will send "three layers of signals"
First layer: Hold on to the 2% target.
This is very unlikely to be relaxed.
Core PCE is still at 3.3%, Waller cannot lower his attention to inflation based on one month of data.
Second layer: Keep the rate hike option open.
This will be the most important hawkish part of his speech.
In other words:
If subsequent CPI and PCE remain high and inflation expectations rise again, further rate hikes remain in the toolbox.
This is actually leaving policy space for a September rate hike.
Third layer: No early commitment to September.
This is actually the part I think is most worth paying attention to.
Currently, the market's probability of a September rate hike has risen back to about 40% due to today's data, but it is still far from the level of "market certainty of a rate hike." 
So if Waller is cautious enough, the most likely statement is:
"Data determines policy, not market pricing."
This also fits his previous style of not wanting to provide excessive forward guidance. 
For BTC, the real danger is not "Waller hawkish"
But:
Waller hawkish + market re-believes in a September rate hike.
If after the speech we see:
Dollar ↑
2-year Treasury yield ↑
September rate hike probability ↑
BTC ↓
Then it means the market has truly accepted his hawkish tone.
Conversely, if Waller emphasizes high inflation but does not explicitly push for a September rate hike, and long-term yields fall, then the market may interpret the speech as:
"Hawks keep the option open but are not in a hurry to act."
This outcome is actually more friendly to BTC and gold.
So tonight/Friday, the three sentences to really listen for are:
① Is "inflation" still the top priority?
② Is "rate hike" the baseline path or just a backup tool?
③ Does he explicitly say September policy must wait for more data?
If yes:
High inflation + rate hikes if necessary + no commitment to September
I think this is hawkish but not extreme.
If further:
High inflation + September rate hike reasonable + no concern about economic resilience
That would be a true hawkish shock.
And if:
Inflation still high + continuing to decline + economic downside risks + policy can remain patient
Then the market may reduce rate hike pricing again.
Godfather's judgment:
After this core PCE release, September rate hike expectations have indeed been pushed higher again, but no certainty trend has formed yet.
So the key at Jackson Hole is not whether Waller will shout "rate hike," but:
Will he upgrade "rate hike" from a backup plan to the policy baseline for the coming months?
If not, then the market may still interpret today's PCE as:
"Inflation is stubborn but not out of control."
For BTC, the most important short-term thing is to watch the 2-year Treasury yield and the dollar. If after the speech both rise sharply but BTC holds key support, it means the market has already priced in hawkish risk; if both continue to rise together, then BTC at high levels should guard against a significant valuation compression.
In short: PCE does not give Waller a reason to turn dovish, but also does not give him enough confidence to directly announce a September rate hike. Jackson Hole is more likely to be "keep rate hike option open, refuse to commit," and the real decision for September policy still depends on upcoming CPI and employment. $BTC #美国核心PCE持平上月，沃什杰克逊霍尔讲话如何定调？ $ETH is compressing inside a well-defined symmetrical triangle after the impulsive markup from $1,900.
Price is now testing the ascending support trendline around $2,430, A critical decision zone.
BEARISH SCENARIO:
1H close below $2,430 → support failure + downside expansion.
Targets: $2,242/$2,204/$2,129
Invalidation: Reclaim of $2,550 with sustained 1H closes.
Until confirmation, avoid chasing. The next liquidity sweep could determine the direction of the expansion.$ETH Ethereum's current price is in a downtrend, with the first support below continuing to be watched at 2430. However, given the current market conditions, breaking this support is only a matter of time. If the price rebounds near this level, it indicates that bullish momentum is starting to counterattack, and the price may see a surge. The key support to watch is 2413; breaking below it would open up new downside space. Those not yet positioned might consider light short positions. #BTC突破80000美元，能否站稳新关口 ETH is currently around $2,450–$2,470, so the proposed $2,440–$2,460 range is broadly consistent with today’s price action. Recent data also shows the market has been volatile around the $2,500 area.
The key idea is:
$2,460: short-term resistance to watch.
Above $2,460 with strong volume: could open the way toward $2,480. Institutional-exclusive arbitrage strategies are quietly moving on-chain
For a long time, quantitative hedging, cross-exchange arbitrage, and private credit strategies have basically been the exclusive toys of institutions and high-net-worth players, with ordinary retail investors unable to even reach the threshold. But something intriguing has happened in the past couple of days. A project called City Protocol announced the completion of its seed and Pre-A rounds of financing, raising a total of $11 million, with investors including veteran crypto institutions like Dragonfly, Jump Crypto, and CMT Digital.
What they want to do is straightforward: move the entire set of structured products onto the blockchain. Simply put, using tokenization layers, vault layers, and issuance operation layers to turn strategies that used to circulate only within institutional circles into products that ordinary people can buy directly in their wallets. Their flagship platform is called Venzo, which has already launched four strategy vaults with a locked value of $40 million.
These vaults don’t contain meme plays but quantitative hedging, cross-exchange arbitrage, and private credit. These strategies were mainly aimed at institutions and professional investors in the past, with almost no access for ordinary people. City Protocol also said they plan to launch thematic vaults next, divided into persona tracking and sector themes, where programs will directly complete the purchase and adjustment of a basket of assets in users’ wallets according to public rules. You pick a theme, and the machine helps you rebalance, which sounds much easier than monitoring the market yourself.
The trend of turning institutional strategies into on-chain products is not just hype from City Protocol. Over the past year, from yield vaults to structured notes, more and more teams have focused on breaking down Wall Street tools for retail investors. The threshold is visibly dropping.
What’s interesting about this is the contrast. On one hand, institutions have always treated complex strategies as a moat; on the other hand, on-chain infrastructure is desperately breaking down, standardizing, and handing these strategies over to ordinary people. Lowering the threshold is certainly good, but can ordinary people really handle it? The risks, fees, and liquidation logic behind these strategies are completely different from buying spot assets, and many people might not even finish reading the manuals.
What’s even more worth pondering is the attitude of capital. While many are still debating whether on-chain finance is a castle in the air, top-tier institutions like Dragonfly and Jump are already investing real money. What they might be looking at is not short-term returns but the possibility of remaking traditional financial structured products on-chain.
So here’s the question: when institutional arbitrage tools start landing in ordinary people’s wallets, is this a step toward financial equality, or just another wave of carefully packaged complexity waiting for less professional money to enter and take the risk? What do you think about this?Brothers, I just saw Maji's response, saying that the Taiwanese media's claim that he had "84 times returns" is fake news. My first reaction was, finally, the guy has some shame? After all, he lost 35 million dollars going long on $ETH over the past 10 months, with his account bottoming out at only 9,000 dollars. Who would be proud of such a record?
But thinking about it more carefully, what exactly is he denying? The media said "150,000 rolling up to 11.15 million" is solidly confirmed on-chain, and this week's single-week rebound was indeed fierce. The problem is, this was a high-leverage gamble, not some investment portfolio management skill. With 12x leverage and over 129 million in long positions still on the table, isn't this just betting your life on a one-sided market?
What’s even more intriguing is that while he denies the rumors, he absolutely refuses to disclose the current leverage ratio and position details. Is it that he dares not say, or cannot say? If ETH drops 10% tomorrow, will he be wiped out again?
I think the funniest part of this whole thing is that the Taiwanese media packaged survivor bias into a myth, and Maji doesn’t want to be labeled as someone who just got lucky to recover. But the on-chain data is cold and hard: losses are losses, gains are gambled, there’s no dignity in that.Claiming everything is fine while secretly poaching key players from competitors
The world's largest cryptocurrency exchange Binance has quietly done something quite intriguing these past few days. It has poached two senior compliance executives in one go from its most direct competitor, Crypto.com. One named Antonio Alvarez has joined as deputy to Chief Compliance Officer Noah Perlman, and the other named Duncan DeVille has taken the role of Global Head of Financial Crime Compliance. Both previously worked at Crypto.com, with resumes that include stints at Coinbase, Visa, Western Union, and even the U.S. Treasury Department.
According to Bloomberg, the news of their joining was first leaked by the media, coinciding with renewed scrutiny by U.S. regulators on crypto exchanges. Looking at the bigger picture, this event takes on a different flavor. Around the time these hires were made, foreign media reported that Binance’s compliance department had lost several senior executives over the past year, with some departure rumors linked to how the platform handled funds related to Iran. Binance responded bluntly, calling these rumors false and stating that its compliance system is functioning normally.
On one hand, there is a straightforward denial; on the other, a large-scale poaching from a rival camp. It’s hard not to read deeper into this. Is it because Binance truly feels its compliance is not strong enough and is stockpiling talent early, or is the external pressure so intense that it needs a high-profile recruitment to send a signal outward?
What’s more subtle is the origin of these two individuals. They didn’t jump from small firms but were pried away from a peer-level competitor like Crypto.com. Crypto.com itself has been under regulatory scrutiny in various regions in recent years. Poaching talent from a competitor makes this drama even more interesting. Binance itself says this poaching is a vote of confidence in its own compliance system, and such talk of trust usually comes out when trust is most needed.
Compliance has never been a cost center for exchanges but a lifeline. Regulatory scrutiny has tightened year by year, and any breach caught is not just a fine but could shake the entire business line. So, the talent poaching between major exchanges on the surface looks like personnel changes, but at its core, it’s an arms race.
For ordinary people, it’s easy to treat this news as mere gossip. But from another perspective, whether an exchange takes compliance seriously directly determines the safety of your assets held there. Next time you see an exchange making a high-profile hire and a high-profile denial, don’t rush to take sides; first, look at which weak spot they are trying to patch.
Whether Binance’s recent moves are truly about upgrading or someone is taking the bullet for them, time will tell.Top market maker suddenly cuts $130 million short positions
The player who is best at shorting in the market made a move last night. According to Onchain Lens monitoring, Wintermute's short exposure on Hyperliquid was slashed from $211.5 million to $80.48 million in one go, meaning it closed about $131 million worth of short positions.
This guy is not an ordinary retail trader. Wintermute is a leading global crypto market maker, with capital and quote depth enough to influence the order book of an exchange. It has been a net short on Hyperliquid for some time, basically betting that the market would continue to slide down. But just as Bitcoin bounced back near $80,000 and the fear and greed index hit a yearly high, it closed most of its short positions.
What’s more puzzling is the detail inside. It still holds $80.48 million in shorts and $5.51 million in longs, so the net short direction hasn’t changed. But on the coin HYPE, its short position actually increased from $5.6 million to $10.2 million, currently showing an unrealized loss of $568,800. Cutting overall shorts while doubling down on shorts for a specific coin is a contradictory stance that has many scratching their heads.
This isn’t the first time it has adjusted positions at critical moments. In the past few months, Wintermute’s short size on Hyperliquid has fluctuated sharply with the market, and every major reduction in position almost coincided with sentiment turning points. What’s different this time is the gap between the scale of its cut and the net short it still holds is more obvious than before. Hyperliquid’s daily active wallets recently broke 80,000, a new high, marking a time when bulls and bears are fiercely competing.
I can think of two explanations. One is that it believes the market has limited room to drop further in the short term, and holding such a large short position risks a short squeeze if a rebound continues, so it’s better to take profits and reduce exposure. The other is that it’s reallocating capital, focusing on what it considers more vulnerable specific targets. Either way, a top market maker publicly adjusting positions is itself a thermometer of market sentiment.
For ordinary players like us, it’s hard to see what it’s really thinking. A position change by a leading institution could be just a risk control move or could hide its true market outlook. Rather than blindly following its moves to guess direction, what’s more worth noting is that when the most professional shorts start to pull back, it at least shows that the most determined bearish forces in this downturn are less confident than before.
What do you think? Is Wintermute’s short reduction this time a mistake exit or a change in strategy? $BTC +37% from the lows
$ETH +60%
The rally has delivered, but the structure is starting to look stretched.
What fueled it? • US Treasury buybacks
• Progress on crypto legislation
• Softer SEC positioning
• A major short squeeze
But there’s a key difference: most of these are sentiment/catalyst drivers not fresh liquidity
That makes the current move harder to sustain
I’m not calling the top — saying the risk/reward is changing.
At these levels, confirmation matters more than chasing momentum. The current trend of Bitcoin can be summarized in one sentence: short-term overheating requires a correction, the mid-term bull market pattern remains unchanged, and $83,000 is the critical line between life and death.
---
1. Current position: rally followed by pullback, bulls and bears battling
Bitcoin surged over 22% last week, once breaking through $81,000, hitting a three-month high. But then it fell back to around $79,000 and fluctuated, dropping about 1.2% in the past 24 hours.
2. Bullish logic (why optimistic)
· Continuous inflow of institutional funds: Spot Bitcoin ETFs have had net inflows for 7 consecutive days, with $314 million inflow on Tuesday alone, totaling over $3 billion in August.
· Improvement in macro liquidity: The U.S. Treasury expanded the scale of Treasury repurchase operations, interpreted by the market as liquidity release, driving Bitcoin and gold to rise simultaneously.
· On-chain data warming up: CryptoQuant's bullish score surged from 30 to 80 within 7 days; analysts believe Bitcoin has exited the bear market and entered the early stage of a bull market.
3. Bearish logic (why there are risks)
· Extreme greed, overheated sentiment: The Fear and Greed Index reached 81, entering the "Extreme Greed" zone for the first time since 2024. Short-term sentiment is already extreme.
· Technical pressure: Key resistance at $83,000 (365-day moving average) and the $80,000-$82,000 range. MACD shows a death cross, indicating weakening short-term momentum.
· Profit-taking surge: The unrealized profit rate among retail investors rose to 20.5%, a new high since June 2025; Bitcoin inflows to exchanges increased, signaling potential selling pressure.
⚠️ The above is only a market information summary and does not constitute any investment advice. Cryptocurrency is highly volatile; please assess risks independently. Circle, which promised not to touch banks, is secretly obtaining licenses
A few years ago in the crypto space, the trendiest slogan was to eliminate banks. When Circle launched USDC back then, the story was about using on-chain dollars to bypass the slow traditional financial cross-border settlement system. But by 2026, this world's second-largest stablecoin issuer is quietly slipping a U.S. banking license into its pocket.
According to an in-depth report by Odaily on August 26, Circle has already obtained a U.S. banking license. When the news reached the community, many were stunned: how could a company that built its narrative on decentralization actively enter a system it and its peers have criticized for over a decade? After all, banks have always been mocked in the crypto world; anyone suggesting cooperation with traditional finance is at best accused of surrender, and at worst labeled as centralized.
The contrast here is stark. We used to understand stablecoins as tools to counter fiat overissuance and bypass bank regulations. But when the market cap reaches tens of billions of dollars, issuers realize one unavoidable fact—if they want institutions to confidently deposit funds and want regulators to cause fewer problems, the most effective way is to hold a license that only traditional banks have. With it, Circle can more directly access dollar settlement channels and even potentially connect directly to the Federal Reserve's payment system, no longer having to humbly ask others to be their bank.
What’s even more intriguing is that Circle is not alone. The report points out that a whole batch of Web3 companies are turning toward "banking." Custodians, payment providers, and settlement operators are collectively starting to envy the status of banks. These companies still talk decentralization but are already moving toward obtaining licenses. The logic is simple: only with a banking identity can they handle institutional money and establish a foothold in the U.S. market. Those who once vowed to disrupt banks are now lining up to become what they once wanted to eliminate.
Ultimately, this is a surrender of reality to ideals. The larger the stablecoin market, the tighter the U.S. regulatory scrutiny; without a license, it means the lifeline can be cut at any time. Rather than living in constant fear in a gray area, it’s better to put on that suit first. Circle’s move now may open the door for more crypto giants to queue up and enter the banking world.
But we can’t help but ask: when crypto companies all become regulated banks, how much of the freedom they originally promised us remains? We embraced crypto to avoid being controlled by anyone. Now, those controlling us have just changed into suits.Linera launches token sale claiming 65% for the community but only releases 5%
Today, news about a new public blockchain quietly spread within the community. Layer 1 project Linera announced that its LNRA token community round registration is open, and participation is possible from today until September 1st using USDC on the Base network. The pricing and scale will only be revealed on August 28th. The lock-up period is set from September 1st to 8th, meaning you register first and find out how much you actually need to pay a few days later.
At first glance, that number sounds impressive. The project team says 65% of the total supply is allocated to the community, which sounds more generous than many established public blockchains. But if you read the fine print carefully, the story changes. That 65% actually includes a large portion called the community reserve, and the actual community sale round only accounts for 5%. In other words, the headline number looks great, but the amount actually released for public purchase this time is just a fraction of the total supply. The project team puts 65% and 5% in the same sentence, making it hard to distinguish the two without close inspection.
Linera is not an unknown newcomer. Many team members come from Meta’s Novi wallet project, focusing on a high-throughput micro-chain architecture, and they have previously secured funding from top-tier institutions. Because of this background, the token sale has attracted buyers. But the more prestigious the project, the more important it is to scrutinize the allocation structure closely.
Who controls the remaining 60% community reserve is not clearly stated in the documents, but insiders know this reserve is usually held by the foundation. Investors get 11.3%, early contributors 13.7%, and the foundation itself keeps 10%. This setup makes the so-called high community involvement feel more like a nice phrase on a PPT slide. When the reserve will be released, at what price, and to whom—all these key questions remain vague, and when the time comes, ordinary token holders basically have no say.
It’s not to say Linera necessarily has problems. For new public blockchains issuing tokens, it’s industry standard for the team to keep a portion and investors to take another. The issue is, when every project uses the same rhetoric, how many times can retail investors really trust it? After all, some early participants in projects claiming community priority have indeed profited, and no one wants to miss the potential takeoff.
What I’m curious about is how many people who registered attracted by the words “community-friendly” will actually read the fine print. Do you know projects around you that shout slogans loudly but when it comes to allocation, you find yourself squeezed into that 5%? Knowing full well you’re likely just a runner-up, yet you can’t help but want to be among the first batch—this mentality itself says a lot. Next time you see a flood of “community-first” claims, it’s worth asking: how much of that 65% really ends up in your hands? Those shouting "crash" might not have understood this round of rebound
Many people feel uneasy watching this round of price increase. Bitcoin bounced up from a low position, altcoins followed flying, and the group chat is full of voices fearing that leveraged bulls will shatter at the slightest touch. But Mizuho's report yesterday gave a somewhat different answer.
The bank's analyst Dan Dolev directly said that the quality of this crypto rebound might be better than before. The key is not how much it has risen, but how the money came in. They observed that coin-margined open interest actually fell to a one-month low after the first rebound, indicating that this rise was not built on high leverage.
Why is this important? In past bull runs, when prices rose, leverage piled up wildly, and open interest in contracts soared. When prices pulled back slightly, high-leverage positions were forcibly liquidated, which in turn crashed the market, causing a chain liquidation that hurt many badly. This time is different: after the rebound, open interest actually declined, meaning the number of people rushing in to bet on direction did not increase, but the amount of real money buying coins did.
The data also matches. Yesterday, the total net inflow into US Bitcoin spot ETFs was $314.3 million, with BlackRock's IBIT alone buying $284.4 million; Ethereum spot ETFs also saw $179.8 million inflow. In August, the total net inflow into Bitcoin ETFs has already reached $2.72 billion, a new high for the year. The money is coming in through compliant channels as real cash, not borrowed chips.
Mizuho's judgment is that if spot demand continues to flow in, platform companies like Robinhood, eToro, and BitGo will have more stable earnings elasticity than single tokens. Because their revenue comes from trading, custody, and institutional services, not relying on the rise or fall of any single coin. This is quite different from the pure speculative narratives of the past two years, where income stopped when coin prices crashed.
Zooming out a bit: in every past rebound, the funding rate for perpetual contracts would instantly spike, a sign of leveraged money rushing in. This time, the funding rate has been very restrained, indicating that leveraged traders are not in a hurry. Coupled with ETFs having seven consecutive days of net inflows, the money is steadily coming in day by day, not an emotional all-in. This pattern indeed looks more like institutions quietly building bottom positions rather than retail investors FOMO chasing highs.
But don't read this as risk-free. Mizuho also left a backup plan in the report: US Treasury yields, the US dollar trend, and risk appetite can clamp down on short-term moves at any time. If Jackson Hole signals a hawkish tone, or if the US stock AI chain continues to pull back, crypto assets will still face short-term pressure.
The interesting part is here. On one hand, the fear and greed index has climbed to 74, a yearly high, yet Bitcoin is hovering around 78,000, showing a clear disconnect between sentiment and price. On the other hand, institutional reports say the foundation is cleaner than before, but retail memories are full of past pain from leveraged liquidations.
Are we afraid of a bubble that doesn't exist, or have we truly understood where the money is coming from this round? This rebound might be completely different from what you think.Top incubators quietly place their bets in three directions
Yesterday, YZi Labs released the list for the fourth phase of EASY Residency, selecting 24 early-stage projects at once, each receiving a direct $500,000 investment. This isn’t a small prize like a hackathon trophy; it’s real equity investment combined with several months of incubation seats. Getting on the list basically means obtaining a ticket to resources and exchange listing channels.
What’s most worth pondering is the clustering of these 24 projects in certain directions. The official focus is on three areas: stablecoin payments, on-chain foreign exchange, and AI agents, with almost no mention of the hottest buzzwords from the past two years. Meme coins, new public chains, and re-staking—once hot investment tracks—didn’t make the list at all, not even touching the edges.
Looking back two years, the incubator’s taste shift is quite striking. The previous round poured money into whoever raised funds aggressively or whose data grew fast, but many projects peaked at launch and their tokens went to zero faster than fundraising. This round clearly changed tactics, choosing projects that can handle real cash flow. Stablecoin payments are currently the most stable cash cow on-chain, on-chain foreign exchange targets the cross-border settlement business long held by traditional banks, and AI agents represent a new way for programs to run tasks on-chain with their own wallets. These three areas are close to money but far from hype.
Why these three and not others? Stablecoins have evolved from speculative assets to a real settlement layer, with daily on-chain volume no longer a number small circles can ignore. Payments and foreign exchange are the largest and most tightly controlled financial sectors by old powers. AI agents sound new but follow the same logic—letting machines manage money and place orders themselves, cutting out the middleman’s cost. The directions chosen by institutions are almost all about grabbing the traditional finance pie.
$500,000 isn’t astronomical for early teams, but what they get is far more than just the money. The incubator’s post-investment support, network, and endorsement often outweigh the check’s value. More importantly, the annual selection direction of such top institutions is the market’s cheapest due diligence report. They use real money to test the waters first, showing everyone what smart money is betting on and what it’s not.
But look at the current community atmosphere—most people are still scrolling meme rankings daily looking for the next 100x, watching which KOL shouted a signal again. Institutions have quietly placed their bets in more boring but solid places. This mismatch happens almost every year; by the time retail investors react and rush in, the cheap chips are gone, leaving a mess for latecomers.
No one can guarantee how many of these 24 projects will succeed. But the $12 million YZi Labs invested in these directions is at least worth your two minutes of thought more than any shouted signal. The next wave of money flow is already clearly written in the list; it’s up to you whether to keep chasing hot trends or to look down and see what institutions are buying.BTC breaking $80K proved buyers can push price higher. Now they need to prove they can keep it there. $1.92B of ETF inflows gives this rebound real spot support, but profitable holders and rising exchange inflows mean more supply is waiting. PCE, Jackson Hole and jobs revisions now add macro risk. The bull case isn't another vertical candle. It's $80K surviving profit-taking while ETF flows and spot volume stay strong. A breakout becomes a trend only when buyers keep showing up#BTC80KHoldOrFold I'm so pissed off!!!
I opened a short at 1489, and it just dropped to 1443 at the lowest, with a floating profit of almost 50 points!!! But I got greedy and didn't exit, thinking "Hold a bit longer, maybe it will hit 1400," and then it pulled back on me... Now the price is 1485, and the floating profit is down to just 1 point, basically all for nothing.
📊 Let's talk about today's two news items:
#美国核心PCE持平上月，沃什杰克逊霍尔讲话如何定调？
Today's PCE data came out, overall meeting expectations—core PCE month-on-month 0.2%, year-on-year 3.3%, consistent with market expectations. On the surface, it looks like "meeting expectations," but if you look closely, something's off: overall PCE year-on-year is 3.7%, 0.1 percentage points higher than expected. Inflation hasn't really come down; it's still sticky.
Once the data was released, the market's expectation for a September rate hike jumped from 36% to 42%. BTC dropped from around 79,000 to over 78,000 in response.
This time market expectations are also low; if the Fed remains ambiguous, the 5% yield level on the 30-year US Treasury might not hold.
For BTC, a dovish Fed → 82,000-90,000, hawkish → 70,000-72,000. This rally from 64,000 to 81,000 has piled up a lot of profit-taking positions; any hawkish signal could trigger a stampede.
#美扩大对伊制裁，海峡复航谈判推进
This one is even more interesting—the US is expanding sanctions on Iran (covering shipping, gold, digital assets, aviation, technology, and more) while simultaneously, under Omani mediation, advancing talks to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.
Iran also warned, "If demands and conditions are not met, the strait will remain closed."
Oil prices immediately fell below $80, and BTC also dropped below 79,000. Expectations of reopening the strait are suppressing oil prices, but sanctions are supporting them, pulling in both directions.
💡 Back to my position:
Sandisk dropped from over 2,000 to 1,488, PCE data is hawkish, Fed speech uncertain, US-Iran tensions ongoing—macroeconomic factors are all question marks. The rebound to 1,485 is indecisive, so I'm holding for now and will wait for the Fed speech to settle things.
Greed is truly the enemy of trading; I've told myself this hundreds of times, yet I keep making the same mistake. 😭
$SNDK $BTC Everyone says the Strait of Hormuz has reopened, but Iran suddenly changed its stance.
The day before yesterday, the market was still spreading news that the main shipping lane of the Strait of Hormuz had resumed passage, causing oil prices to ease and everyone to breathe a sigh of relief. However, yesterday, a statement from Iran's Deputy Foreign Minister tightened the tension again.
In an interview on August 25, Garibabadi said that Iran is still in a state of war, and the Strait of Hormuz is under the full control and surveillance of the Iranian armed forces. Unless Iran consents, approves, and arranges it, this global energy lifeline will not reopen. He added something even more serious: if conditions are right, Iran can take preemptive action against U.S. targets instead of waiting for the other side to make the first move.
This is quite interesting. Two days ago, everyone thought the worst shipping risks were over, but now the party involved has effectively shut the door again. Whether the strait has reopened or not, the market may need to reprice.
Looking at the timeline makes it clearer. A few days ago, Saudi Arabia led the Mecca Agreement, which the market interpreted as the Middle East reducing its security dependence on the U.S. and the situation cooling down. Then news came that the main shipping lane was reopening, and oil prices responded by falling. But just a few days later, Iran's Deputy Foreign Minister laid out the preconditions for reopening. The cooling and the sudden reversal were separated by just one interview.
For us crypto traders, this can't just be seen as a spectacle. The Strait of Hormuz handles about one-fifth of the world's oil transportation. If this route tightens, oil prices rise, inflation expectations return, and the Federal Reserve's rate cut narrative is questioned. All of this ultimately impacts risk assets; Bitcoin is never an isolated island.
What stands out even more is the contrast itself. On one side, the U.S. military cleared over a hundred mines, and the media said the route was reopened; on the other, Iran says the gate remains closed without its nod. This conflicting information is exactly what can cause market panic. When you don't know which side is telling the truth, capital will likely flee first.
Looking back, this round of market activity is also subtle. Bitcoin just bounced back near 80,000, ETFs are still seeing continuous net inflows, and sentiment is heating up, but geopolitical issues are stirring trouble again. Bulls say safe-haven funds will flow into Bitcoin, bears say rising oil prices push inflation and force the Fed to change course—both sides have their reasons.
What we should really focus on next is not some candlestick but whether the Strait of Hormuz will actually open and whether Iran will really take action. Until this matter is resolved, oil price volatility will continue to transmit into the crypto market. What do you think—Is Iran just posturing, or are they really going to block the route? Which side should the market believe? #美扩大对伊制裁，海峡复航谈判推进