Orbit Post Sitemap
Capital Flow Observation: All Three Coins Lack New Inflows, Don't Mistake a Rebound for a Reversal
🔸$BTC: Funds Are Still Withdrawing
4-hour spot net outflow of $163 million, contract net outflow of $543 million; 24-hour spot -$1.064 billion, contracts -$3.098 billion; 30-day spot -$1.727 billion, contracts -$10.266 billion. Insufficient spot support, leverage continues to contract, evidence for stabilization remains inadequate.
🔸$ETH: Short-term Warmth, Big Money Hasn't Returned
4-hour spot net inflow of $37.06 million, but contracts still outflowing $171 million; 24-hour spot -$116 million, contracts -$2.044 billion; 30-day spot -$3.197 billion, contracts -$9.931 billion. Some short-term trial positions by funds, but no clear mid-term capital inflow, so rebound sustainability is discounted.
🔸$SOL: Spot Selling Pressure Is Light, Leverage Also Withdrawing
4-hour spot -$16.13 million, contracts -$18.66 million; 24-hour spot -$96.31 million, contracts -$305 million; 30-day spot -$58.24 million, contracts -$2.13 billion.
The common issue for all three is not the decline but the absence of incremental funds. Spot funds are not returning; treat the rebound as a pullback first. Strategically maintain a bearish bias, don't rush to guess the bottom, let the capital flow signal first.
#美联储官员释放加息信号，12月预期仍存分歧 Leverage liquidation is nearing its end, and the market structure has already fractured.
BTC 77,789 (+0.63%), ETH 2,265 (+1.01%). Slight recovery after a spike.
Leverage liquidation is entering its final phase. 24h liquidations have sharply dropped to 48.72 million, balancing long and short clearances. The extreme one-sided stampede has ended, and short squeeze odds have narrowed.
Capital flow is fracturing. BTC ETF net inflow is 135 million, becoming the sole absorber; ETH net outflow is 156 million, bleeding for five consecutive days. Funds are clearly retreating into BTC, abandoning ETH.
Whale divergence. Some spent 17.24 million to buy 7,703 ETH; others locked profits on longs and then opened 20,000 ETH short positions.
Macro pressure. December rate hike expectations exceed 70%, suppressing risk asset valuations.
Key levels:
BTC support at 76,500 is the lifeline, resistance at 77,800.
ETH support at 2,200 is a psychological barrier, resistance at 2,279 is the watershed.
In short: The most intense phase of leverage stampede has passed, but ETH is abandoned by funds and whales are divided, indicating structural weakness. Do not chase shorts or catch the falling knife; wait for BTC to stabilize above 76,500 or ETH to reclaim 2,279 before lightly entering longs. I came across this kind of news, and the first thought in my mind wasn't "which small coin can benefit," but rather: stablecoins are getting a bit closer to everyday accounts. This is somewhat interesting, but there are still several hurdles between opening the channel and related tokens benefiting. 👀
According to the official announcement from OnePay, it has partnered with Stripe to launch a stablecoin top-up feature, initially available to some users in the United States. Users can transfer $USDC from external wallets or exchanges into their OnePay Checking account, where it is automatically converted into US dollars, supporting 12 blockchains including Tempo, Base, Solana, and Ethereum.
My judgment is that this is somewhat positive sentiment for the payment sector, but for small coins, it feels more like a narrative catalyst rather than evidence of profitability. The automatic conversion to dollars after top-up reduces the operational friction of moving on-chain funds into everyday accounts; supporting multiple chains also means this potential is not exclusive to any single chain.
Highly volatile assets tend to amplify "progress in scenarios" into "any involvement has potential," with opportunities and downside risks often appearing together. If usage increases later, I will look further into which chains the funds pass through and where the fees flow; if there is traffic but no token value capture, the excitement might just be temporary.
I will first track the scope of the rollout and actual user feedback, and I’m not in a rush to label all payment concepts as positive. Regarding stablecoins entering everyday accounts, recently, is the focus more on payment applications, public chain infrastructure, or compliance service sectors?#OKX, ICE, and Trade.xyz join forces to promote perpetual contracts entering the compliant US market $BTC $ETH
The cryptocurrency industry invested over $200 million in the 2026 US midterm elections, essentially a highly targeted "regulatory survival investment" rather than a general political statement. Its core logic is to use financial resources to directly purchase "legislative clarity."
This money primarily targets the legislative deadlock. The industry's most critical demand—the comprehensive digital asset market structure bill (such as the "Clarity Act")—is stalled in the Senate due to bipartisan disagreements. The purpose of the huge donations is to elect lawmakers willing to push the bill forward, avoiding the industry’s prolonged exposure to regulatory uncertainty. Coinbase describes it as "bringing the 20th-century financial system into the 21st century," but in essence, it is about securing a set of rules favorable to themselves.
Ultimately, this $200 million investment is a high-risk bet by the crypto industry during a regulatory window. It may delay the emergence of unfavorable rules or replace one or two staunch critics in key positions, but it cannot substitute for genuine political consensus. For an industry seeking mainstream legitimacy, using money to pave the way for regulatory exemptions is itself a fragile form of legitimacy.Title: Bitcoin vs. Gold: Is the 14-Month Bear Market Cycle Signaling a Major Bottom? History reveals an interesting pattern in Bitcoin's performance against gold. In 2014, $BTC took approximately 14 months to reach its bottom relative to gold before reversing. In 2018, the same 14-month pattern appeared, marking another major turning point. In 2022, once again, Bitcoin formed a significant cycle bottom after roughly 14 months. Now, the current $BTC bear market against gold has reached that samThe stablecoin supply has dropped to $298.5 billion, hitting a new low since August.
It shrank by $3.1 billion over four days since October 28, down $5.2 billion from the start of the year, fully reversing the intra-year peak of $315.5 billion on May 17. Stablecoins serve as a direct gauge of on-exchange funds; expansion indicates new money entering, while contraction signals redemptions or funds staying on the sidelines. This rapid decline is somewhat bearish for $BTC and $ETH liquidity.
But don’t rush to declare a "full capital withdrawal": $3.1 billion out of a $300 billion supply is less than 1%, more like a marginal signal of cooling risk appetite. What really matters is whether USDT and USDC continue to see net outflows from exchange deposit addresses—if outflows represent genuine exits rather than portfolio shifts into RWA and tokenized government bonds, future rebounds will rely more on existing funds competing, reducing the attractiveness of chasing highs.
Source: PANews
Are you more focused on net outflows from deposit addresses, or on the uptake of RWA and tokenized government bonds?Title: Storage Stocks Under Pressure: Is the Left-Side Bottom-Fishing Window Approaching? The pre-market outlook remains weak, and even the storage sector couldn't sustain its brief rebound led by SK Hynix. Selling pressure has returned, with Google trading near its March lows while Micron and SanDisk are testing their July support levels. The next major catalysts are the November 3 midterm elections and developments in the ongoing geopolitical conflict. Two scenarios are worth watching: - If boThe account structure of a top trader is sending a glaring signal: $BTC short positions have become the sole profit engine, while $ETH long positions and HYPE short positions are both stuck in unrealized losses, with HYPE alone swallowing over $4 million in book value. This is not an ordinary position adjustment but an extreme stress test on "using funding rates to sustain unrealized losses." Breaking it down makes it clearer. The $BTC full short position uses 40x leverage, holding -249.9 units, entry price $78,104.1, current unrealized profit of $177,000, plus funding income of $150,300, with a liquidation price far at $101,662.99 — this is the anchor of the entire portfolio. The $ETH full long position uses 25x leverage, holding 9,823.81 units, entry price $2,427.28, unrealized loss of $1,800,500, funding cost of $65,100, liquidation price $1,606.21. The most striking is HYPE: 5x leverage full short position holding -261,900 units, entry price $71.8484, unrealized loss as high as $4,147,700, but funding income surprisingly reaches $1,165,600, liquidation price $109. The real insight lies in the structure. Total positions amount to $64,349,400, with a total book loss of $5,771,200, yet this portfolio does not rely on directional bets to win but depends on $BTC shortJust brewed a cup of coffee to wake myself up, but after looking at the contract data of these popular altcoins, I was so scared I almost threw the cup! Brothers, don’t be fooled by Bitcoin playing dead right now; the leverage on these altcoins below is already pushing the patience of the market makers to the limit, ready to launch a sudden attack at any moment!
First, look at $XRP, current price 1.25. The 4-hour long-short ratio has absurdly risen to 3.58, and open interest has hit a recent high, skyrocketing nonstop. The main market is stagnant, but retail investors are all rushing into XRP, wildly increasing leverage on the long side. It’s all longs. This extreme crowding means that if the main market softens even a little, XRP will definitely be the first to get hit and have its long positions liquidated.
Next, $HYPE at 87.5. This previously hyped coin has completely cooled off now, drifting down from a high level. The 4-hour long-short ratio is around 1.8, and open interest has sharply shrunk. It’s obvious the main players have finished distributing their chips at the top, while retail investors are still foolishly waiting for a second wave.
Finally, $ZEC at 1249. Previously, the bears were extremely aggressive. The long-short ratio has slowly climbed from 0.48 back to 1.16, indicating bears are taking profits and closing positions, while bulls are stepping in to buy the dip. But its rebound is weak and soft, likely to keep grinding at the bottom repeatedly, wearing down the bulls’ patience.
In summary, liquidity is poor over the weekend, and the main players are conducting “targeted demolitions” in these local altcoins. Crowded longs must be avoided; don’t be cannon fodder.
Do you hold any of these altcoins? Are you profiting or stuck? Monday’s opening is coming—whose drop will be the biggest?
#美联储官员释放加息信号，12月预期仍存分歧 BTC hasn't counterattacked yet, but the bulls are already overcrowding? The long-short ratio of SOL has surged to 3.3, can this ride really hold?
Brothers, this weekend's market is really something! BTC is still hovering in place, but those bottom-fishers have already packed the carriage, like fighting for tickets during the Spring Festival travel rush!
First, look at $BTC, the price is fluctuating around 77,000–78,000, and the 4-hour long-short account ratio has surged to about 2.6!
The market hasn't really risen, but the bulls have already piled up. The upper resistance at 78,000 is stubbornly unbroken; this hardly looks like a counterattack. I suspect it's more of a bull trap!
Next, look at $ETH, the long-short ratio is close to 3! Binance's open interest previously dropped from around $9 billion to $8.4 billion, and now has only recovered to just over $8.6 billion.
The bulls are shouting bottom-fishing, but contract positions haven't regained vitality. How much confidence can this rebound really have?
Finally, look at $SOL, even more absurd! The long-short ratio is approaching 3.3, the most crowded among the three coins! If the market suddenly turns, this batch of bottom-fishers will probably suffer again.
My judgment: short-term bias remains bearish, the rebound looks more like a bull trap. Although the long-short ratio doesn't equal position size, such crowding is worth caution!
Those bullish brothers, stop lurking! With such a crowded bullish market, what reason do you have to believe it can keep rallying?
#美联储官员释放加息信号，12月预期仍存分歧 Hyperliquid whale trump cards $BTC $ETH
Negative fee rate holding firm, is the main force betting on a reversal? 🐋
Core signals: Huge long-short divergence, smart money is bottom-fishing on the left side.
1. Position bias: Shorts 5.6 billion > Longs 4.7 billion. Large funds overall remain bearish or hedging, upper resistance not cleared
2. Abnormal fee rate: Long position funding fee -$65.13 million. Bulls are "paying" to go long, indicating the main force firmly believes the bottom has arrived, willing to bear the fee to hold positions
3. Whale movements: BTC/ETH show million-level buy-ins to open longs, while AAVE is selling to close longs. Funds are flowing back from altcoins to mainstream, main force is sacrificing minor assets to protect the major ones
💡 Trader's notes
Negative fee rate + whale buying = characteristics of a phase bottom, but shakeouts will be intense.
Strategy: Don't blindly chase shorts. If BTC stabilizes, huge short positions may trigger a short squeeze. Watch altcoins for profit-taking exits, closely follow mainstream coins Binance has resumed withdrawals of USDC, USDT, and ETH on the Ethereum network, and also reopened USDC, USDT, and $BNB withdrawals on the BNB Smart Chain. Security checks are still ongoing, and other assets and networks will be gradually reopened in phases.
Let's look at the order first. The first batch released on both chains are stablecoins; Ethereum also released $ETH, and BSC released $BNB. Stablecoins are the transaction fees on-chain, so opening them first indicates that the basic fund transfers are secure; simultaneously opening the mainnet tokens means large assets can also move. This order follows the urgency of fund flow.
Next, consider the weight. Ethereum is the main battlefield for DeFi and institutional custody, while BSC is the main battlefield for retail investors and low-fee trading. Opening both simultaneously reconnects usage scenarios at both high and low ends.
The direct impact on price is limited. Withdrawal does not equal selling; funds move from the platform wallet to the user's own wallet, so positions remain unchanged. There are two indirect effects: price discounts will narrow, as asset price differences inside and outside the platform tend to occur when channels are blocked; sentiment-wise, having an anchor like free withdrawals itself is an endorsement.
What’s really worth watching is the "phased" approach. Since checks are not finished, the list of issues is not cleared. Subsequent announcements will be more informative than this one: if a second batch opens within a few days, the matter can be considered resolved; if it stops at stablecoins and mainnet tokens, it means some assets have not yet passed.
One question remains: when the platform decides which assets can be withdrawn first and which must wait, whose hands is the liquidity of your holdings really in? 📌SNDK: Bulls are crowding to bottom-fish, risks are accumulating $SNDK
▪️Market status: There is still about 10% downside space to the 1000 support level, the long-short ratio is as high as 6.92, with a large amount of capital bottom-fishing on the left side
▪️Core logic: This round of decline is smooth and lacks strong support; the previous big drop has already consumed a round of bottom-fishing enthusiasm, so bulls entering now are likely to become new selling pressure
▪️My view: Do not simply guess the bottom based on "large decline" during a downtrend. Without stabilization signals, left-side bottom-fishing has low cost-effectiveness. Be patient and wait for the support to form a stop-fall structure before considering entry; do not rush in.
#闪迪业绩超预期并宣布拆股，股价跌逾13% PEARL Miner Earnings Stress Test: Coin Price Plummets 35%, Hashrate Declines, Some Profit Passively While Others Exit The PEARL public chain, which gained popularity through the PoUW (Proof of Useful Work) narrative, has recently experienced a significant coin price correction, dropping over 35% in ten days. This triggered a decline in the entire network's hashrate and caused a clear split among the miner community. This volatility reveals the fragility of the mining economic model: when there is a time lag between coin price changes and network difficulty adjustments, miner earnings deteriorate rapidly. Mechanism of Earnings Squeeze Miner earnings depend on coin price, network difficulty, and hardware efficiency. When the coin price rises, new miners enter, pushing difficulty up; however, difficulty adjustments lag behind. When the coin price reverses, single-unit earnings decline faster than cost reductions. Late entrants—especially miners who purchased hardware at high prices—face losses. Hashrate follows the coin price but the lag effect penalizes marginal operators. Miner Community Divergence The miner community has split into several groups: Household miners with sunk hardware costs only need to cover electricity fees; as long as marginal earnings exceed electricity costs, they remain profitable and continue mining. Large-scale mining farms weigh the opportunity cost between mining and AI leasing. Due to strong demand for AI computing power, some farms have shifted to AI business, treating mining as a backup option. Short-term cloud miners face high rental costs; when coin prices fall, profits vanish quickly, causing them to exit first. Long-term miners choose to hold due to locked contracts or optimism about future market conditions. Structural Risks Beyond Price PEARL also faces multiple hidden risks: over 90% of hashrate is not engaged in real AI computation but is idling, disconnecting narrative from reality; daily token issuance creates continuous selling pressure,Why is $ETH showing stronger short-term performance than $BTC ? One possible explanation is the flow of funds linked to the recent Binance security incident. A significant portion of the stolen assets was held in ETH, while Binance may also need to purchase ETH in the market to cover its exposure. These factors could be providing temporary support for ETH and explaining its relative strength against BTC. However, this dynamic may not last. If hackers begin converting their ETH holdings into casThe cross-border payment logic of $XLM needs to verify the chain of "network usage — fees — token demand." When global financial institutions tighten risk controls, compliant settlement may receive more attention, but stablecoins and traditional payment systems are also competing. The narrative is only complete if the settlement volume and on-chain activity continue to grow and bring token usage demand; if only the partner list expands without data changes, the market will continue to discount.Prices dropped 5% to 7%, yet the long-short ratio rose across the board — the harder the drop, the tighter the bulls squeeze, and leverage hasn't been cleared.
$BTC around 77,660, down 5.02%, low at 76,519. The long-short ratio rose from 2.45 to 2.74, with liquidations overwhelmingly on the long side. But ETF net inflow for the day was 135 million, absorbing 1,684 BTC, almost the only party taking the other side. 76,895 is the densest area for bulls, less than 1% from the current price; above that, 80,133 is the concentrated zone for shorts.
$ETH around 2,229, down 5.87%, long-short ratio 2.84. ETF net outflow of 156 million, bleeding for five consecutive days. 2,200 is the line the market is supporting.
$SOL around 94.85, down 7.63%, the largest drop; long-short ratio 3.37, highest among the three coins. ETF net inflow of 6.12 million for the day, the only direction still receiving funds; but about 1.223 million SOL (117 million USD) transferred into Coinbase Prime on the 31st. Fee rate -0.0097%, shorts pay, bulls still hold 76.1%. 95 is the direct defense line, 92 is the next level.
In short: liquidations clear leverage, but leverage hasn't been fully cleared. Bulls are still holding, ETFs are selectively absorbing, and these three coins are waiting for the next real money to come in.
For record-keeping of market conditions only, not investment advice.
#美联储官员释放加息信号，12月预期仍存分歧 Weekend market was stagnant with slight fluctuations, BTC repeatedly hovered around 77,000, but on-chain whale activity revealed the bottom cards—someone is quietly withdrawing chips from exchanges.
$BTC: $77,892. In the aftermath of the Binance hack, BTC spot ETFs saw a single-day net inflow of $135 million, becoming almost the only buyer amid panic, while ETH and SOL ETFs continued to bleed. 77,000 is the convergence defense line of the weekly 21 EMA and the 365-day moving average; holding it is key to stabilization.
$ETH: $2,267. ETFs have bled for five consecutive days, with cumulative outflows in October approaching historical extremes, institutions are withdrawing. But whales accumulated 127,000 ETH during the decline, holding 4.59% of total supply. ETFs are selling, whales are buying, 2,200 is the referee.
$SOL: $95.29. Two whales withdrew nearly 320,000 SOL from Binance within 10 hours, worth about $33.55 million; on-chain withdrawals diverge from price consolidation. 95 is the short-term defense line, but whale withdrawals often signal an impending market shift.
Summary: ETFs are buying BTC but withdrawing from ETH and SOL, while whales continue accumulating ETH and SOL during the decline. Do you trust the ETF ledger or the whales' moves? Share your thoughts in the comments.
#现货ETF资金分化，BTC卖压仍在 ICE brings Hyperliquid technology into the US regulated market, but the price has dropped from 98 back to 87.5 — is this a realization of positive news or a dump by whales unlocking 9.9 million tokens on November 6? If you wait for 80, you might get 90 instead. First, look at the surface: huge positive news, yet the price is timid. At the end of October, when the ICE partnership news broke, HYPE surged from 75-80 straight up to 93-97, approaching the all-time high of 98. Then what? Profit-taking hit, macro softened, and now it’s stuck grinding in the 86-89 range. The 24-hour trading volume is still at the 1.5 billion level, liquidity is solid, but volume has dropped from the pulse peak. The candlestick chart tells you: the big trend is intact, weekly chart still shows higher highs and higher lows, but short-term it’s a digestion phase after news-driven spikes. RSI has moved from overbought back to neutral, this is a healthy correction, not a trend break — but the premise is that 85 holds. The first thing: ICE is not just talking, it’s literally moving the table onto Wall Street. NYSE parent company ICE has reached an agreement with Trade[XYZ] to launch a CFTC-regulated perpetual futures market in the US using Hyperliquid’s HIP-3 framework, covering crypto, stocks, indices, commodities, and forex. Consider the weight of this statement. Previously, HYPE’s narrative was “the strongest on-chain perpetual DEX.” Now? It has become a candidate tech stack for traditional financial infrastructure. This is not community hype; this is the New York Stock Exchange’s parent putting real money and regulatory resources to validate it. Stan Druckenmiller publicly$ETH ETH current price is 2267, the trend remains highly correlated with BTC, overall showing a weak follow-up rebound without independent buying pressure. Although the elasticity is greater, the rebound's sustainability is poor. The first short-term resistance is near 2310, which has been a pressure point multiple times recently. Only by stabilizing above this level can there be a chance to further test the trapped position pressure zone around 2370; the nearest support below is at 2230, with strong support at 2180. If BTC weakens and dips again, ETH is likely to break down first and release selling pressure. On the capital side, ETH's ETF fund outflows are repeated, institutional capital entry willingness is low, on-chain activity and Gas fees remain low, lacking fundamental positive support. The market is mostly fluctuating with the sentiment of BTC's existing funds. Currently, the market is still in a recovery and consolidation phase after the decline; the rebound is a passive follow-up, not suitable for active long positions. Short-term trading must pay close attention to BTC's direction. Once BTC's rebound weakens, ETH's pullback amplitude is often more severe. Leveraged positions must strictly implement stop-loss measures. #美联储官员释放加息信号，12月预期仍存分歧 BTC hits 78,023, ETH eyes 2,275: After a crowded long side, who will be the first to trigger the liquidity below?
At this moment, I lean more towards observing from a short perspective rather than chasing the upward momentum of the market. BTC contracts are around 77,862.10, up 0.44% since UTC midnight today, but the increase is not significant when the price nears the 24-hour high of 78,023; ETH is around 2,266.61, also close to the 2,275 high. Both sides are pushing prices up, seemingly testing how many buyers remain above.
What I focus on is not "whether it has risen," but whether long positions are starting to become crowded. Long positions account for 71.42% of all BTC accounts and 72.89% for ETH; among top traders by position value, longs also account for 62.51% and 60.29% respectively. When most people fixate on breaking above, the market often experiences selling pressure after a rally, especially since the 1-hour RSI for both is in overbought territory.
If BTC cannot absorb supply near 78,023 for a long time, short-term chips may look for liquidity around 77,320.70; if ETH repeatedly faces resistance near 2,275, the 2,240.34 area below is also worth watching. Funding rates remain positive, indicating long sentiment has not exited; however, open interest has slightly declined in the past hour, meaning chasing funds have not expanded uniformly.
This is just my subjective observation of chip and liquidity structure and does not constitute any trading advice.#加密行业协同守护资产安全
Binance has replenished 90% of the assets, but does that mean exchange security is guaranteed?
This security incident at Binance is entering a stage even more critical than the day of the theft.
On October 31, Binance announced that about $6.3 billion in affected assets had 90% replenished. The funds came from company reserves, the SAFU fund, and some contract insurance funds.
On November 1, the platform announced a phased restoration of withdrawals.
At this point, I actually think there is a more worthy question to discuss.
What truly reflects an exchange's security capability: never having incidents, or being able to cover losses after an incident?
Replenishing assets is certainly important, but it does not mean the security vulnerabilities have been completely resolved.
Going forward, it remains to be seen whether the cause of the attack can be identified, whether withdrawals can be fully restored, whether reserve proofs can be independently verified, and whether compensation promises can be fully fulfilled.
For ordinary users, no matter how large the exchange is, it should not be a reason to store all assets in one place.
My view is simple: exchanges are responsible for providing trading services, but asset risk ultimately needs to be managed by oneself.
After experiencing this incident, would you still keep most of your assets long-term on a single exchange?
#Binance #ExchangeSecurity #AssetSecurity #Cryptocurrency #RiskManagement"Uptober" crashed, but the one truly abandoned is not BTC, it's ETH.
October:
BTC -7.2%, ETF net outflow $520 million, 13 days of net inflow out of 22 days
ETH -16%, ETF net outflow $1.61 billion, only 3 days of net inflow out of 22 days
ETH's decline is more than twice that of BTC, ETF bleeding is three times.
Current price BTC $77.9K｜ETH $2,268｜Fear & Greed 34
Will ETH catch up in November or continue to bleed?
$BTC $ETH In the past 24 hours, BTC and ETH shorts were crushed, while XPL longs suffered heavy losses! After looking at this liquidation chart, I feel the market divergence is becoming increasingly obvious.
Let's first look at the mainstream coins.
$BTC liquidations totaled $8.296 million, with 82.9% from shorts;
$ETH liquidations totaled $8.6104 million, with shorts accounting for 83.1%.
Mainstream coins rebounded slightly, causing many shorts to break, with ETH's liquidation amount even surpassing BTC.
But altcoins tell a completely different story.
$XPL liquidations reached $24.6664 million in one day, nearly 3 times that of BTC, with 98.9% being longs.
HYPE liquidations were $5.3258 million, with longs accounting for 93.6%;
Other sectors liquidated $5.4159 million, with longs making up 66.7%.
This indicates that the current market's leverage risk is concentrated in different directions. Shorts are under pressure on the BTC and ETH side, while longs are still being liquidated on the XPL and HYPE side.
This also explains why sometimes BTC barely drops, but some altcoins can fall very badly.
However, don't assume the bull market is back just because shorts are liquidated, nor think the bottom is reached just because longs are wiped out.
Liquidation data only shows who was liquidated in the past 24 hours; it cannot directly predict the upcoming trend.
In the current market, the biggest fear is repeated spikes up and down, where chasing longs or shorts can both lead to losses.
#美股與金銀同步大跌，避險資金流向分化 A message that could easily be mistaken for a PR release actually reveals traditional finance's attitude toward the on-chain world: HSBC plans to establish a global AI research institute in Hong Kong, operational by early 2027, initially focusing on three areas: AI applications, blockchain technology, and post-quantum cryptography.
First, look at the terms it chose. AI applications represent efficiency, blockchain is the ledger, and post-quantum cryptography is security. These three happen to be the top concerns for institutions entering the space: computational power, clear record-keeping, and resistance to breaches. A bank's research institute not studying lending but focusing on these three indicates it views on-chain infrastructure as something it must understand itself.
Next, consider the scale. HSBC currently has a 150-person AI specialist team in Hong Kong, expected to double in the next two to three years. This number alone isn't impressive, but recruiting locally, leasing office space, and engaging with regulators represent real physical investment. The signal is not just slogans but actual personnel and budget.
The mechanism also makes sense. Banks fear two things most about blockchain: lack of regulatory recognition and the risk that key systems will be broken by quantum computing in the future. Hong Kong's virtual asset framework is becoming clearer, and post-quantum cryptography is included in the list, meaning it addresses both "can we do this now" and "will it be secure later."
Judgment-wise, this won't bring immediate buying pressure to $BTC or $ETH. Its impact is on infrastructure three to five years down the line, not tomorrow's market.
What’s worth considering is that even HSBC is researching post-quantum cryptography; projects still using old curves on-chain will sooner or later have their security narratives repriced.US Treasury sell-off, don't rush to be the bagholder (｡•́︿•̀｡)
The so-called "risk-off divergence" is just a cover-up. The core issue is that US Treasury yields are approaching 5%, making risk-free interest too attractive, causing funds to collectively withdraw from high-risk pools and deleverage across all categories.
$BTC fell below 77,000; under high interest pressure, it is a highly volatile risk asset. When Wall Street lacks cash, it sells the most liquid assets first; with heavy overhead resistance and ETF outflows, long-term spot holdings can endure, but short-term rebound chasing is like catching a knife barehanded (￣▽￣)"
$ETH is even weaker, with the ecosystem lacking new narratives and weak support. When the market softens, it falls first, making bottom-fishing risky and likely to turn into a "big loser."
$XAU gold also dropped over 3%, not because safe-haven demand failed, but because institutions are using it to cover margin gaps, and crowded profit-taking triggered a liquidity stampede. Central bank buying provides underlying support, but don't be in a hurry while the stampede continues.
The Philadelphia Semiconductor Index fell 7%, driven by valuation cuts; with 10-year US Treasury yields near 5%, money is chasing interest. Cash is king; a big drop doesn't mean cheap. Control your impulses and wait for deleveraging to clear before acting (•̀ω•́)✧
#美股与金银同步大跌，避险资金流向分化 [Pharaoh's Market Watch]
US stocks fell, and gold and silver also plunged. What happened to the promised safe-haven assets? Where did the money actually go?
Pharaoh bluntly says, this is called "everyone flies away when disaster strikes, only to find there is no safe harbor, and all fall into the drain of US Treasuries."
First, look at this bizarre scene. Tech stocks reported disappointing earnings, so the US stock market's big drop is understandable. But gold and silver, the traditional kings of safe havens, also plunged in sync. Why? Because the Fed officials are still hawkish, and the 10-year US Treasury yield is stubbornly stuck above 5%. Think about it, isn't it attractive to just lie back and earn 5% risk-free interest?
What does this mean for Bitcoin?
Bitcoin is in the most awkward position right now. It wanted to wear the "digital gold" label to hedge risk, but when it looks down, it finds itself tagged as a "high beta tech stock." When US stocks fall, it falls too; when gold falls, it can't escape either. Not to mention that just a few days ago, hackers stole billions, and market confidence hasn't fully recovered. But Pharaoh has to say a long-term logic: when gold's safe-haven halo is stripped away by high interest rates, capital will sooner or later realize that the hole in US Treasuries is getting bigger. This extremely distorted macro environment, in the long run, is actually the best breeding ground for Bitcoin's "non-sovereign asset" narrative, though in the short term, everyone is still panicking.
How to view the market now?
Bitcoin is currently "breathing" below 79,000, with 80,000 as a welded ceiling above, and 76,000 as a freshly broken, bloodied support below $BTC $ETH $SOL #美股与金银同步大跌，避险资金流向分化 $87.5 worth of HYPE, do you dare to take it?
ICE brings Hyperliquid technology into the US regulated market, but the price has dropped from 98 back to 87.5—Is this a realization of positive news or a whale unloading 9.9 million tokens unlocked on November 6? If you wait for 80, you might end up with 90.
Let's look at the surface first: huge positive news, but the price is timid.
At the end of October, when the ICE partnership news broke, HYPE surged from 75-80 straight to 93-97, approaching the all-time high of 98. Then what? Profit-taking hit hard, macro softened, and now it’s stuck grinding between 86-89. The 24-hour trading volume is still around 1.5 billion, liquidity is solid, but volume has dropped from the pulse peak.
The candlestick chart tells you: the big trend is intact, weekly chart still shows higher highs and higher lows, but short-term is just a digestion phase after news-driven spikes. RSI has retreated from overbought to neutral, this is a healthy correction, not a trend break—but the premise is that 85 holds.
First thing: ICE isn’t just talking, it’s literally bringing the table to Wall Street.
NYSE parent company ICE has reached an agreement with Trade[XYZ] to launch a CFTC-regulated perpetual futures market in the US using Hyperliquid’s HIP-3 framework, covering crypto, stocks, indices, commodities, and forex.
Think about the weight of that statement.
Previously, HYPE’s narrative was “the strongest on-chain perpetual DEX.” Now? It has become a candidate tech stack for traditional financial infrastructure. This isn’t community hype, it’s the New York Stock Exchange’s parent company putting real money and regulatory resources to validate it.
Stan Druckenmiller publicly endorses it, and Elon’s side is also discussing. Old money in traditional finance isn’t here to speculate on crypto; they’re here to use your technology for their own business.
Positive news landing is not the end, it’s the start of turnover. You fear unlocking, the whales fear you won’t get on board.
Second thing: nearly 5% of supply has been burned, but there’s a knife on November 6.
The protocol has burned about 49.87 million HYPE, close to 5% of max supply. The Assistance Fund continuously buys back and burns with trading fees, accumulating over $1.3 billion in revenue, with 30-day revenue still around 60-70 million.
This flywheel is real: volume → fees → buyback → supply reduction → price support.
But around November 6, the core contributor unlock window arrives, about 9.9 million tokens.
This is the most annoying short-term game: Burn vs Unlock. On one side, daily real money buybacks; on the other, unlocked tokens might dump. Which will the market trade first? It depends on sentiment.
Burning is a long-term story, unlocking is a short-term litmus test. It tests not the project, but the holders’ guts.
Third thing: technically, one sentence—85 is the lifeline.
Short-term support: 85-86 (recent lows)
Stronger support: 80-82 (previous breakout zone/EMA area)
Below that: 75-76
Short-term resistance: 90-92
Strong resistance: 95-98 (ATH zone)
Currently at 87.5, right in the middle. Only a solid break above 90 with volume can lead to retesting 95-98; a break below 85 with volume means looking at 82-80 first.
Bull vs Bear, judge for yourself
On one side:
ICE partnership is a qualitative validation, traditional finance at the table
Nearly 5% supply burned, buyback flywheel is real
Strong protocol revenue, fundamentals align well with price
Big trend intact, weekly still in an uptrend channel
Relatively stronger than the market, weekly double-digit gains still possible
On the other side:
November 6 unlock window, 9.9 million tokens pressure looming
BTC oscillating at 77-78k, Fear & Greed still in fear zone
Macro tightening, high-beta assets under correction pressure
Retraced 10-11% from 98, profit-taking not fully cleaned out
Fed rates high, November 6 nonfarm payrolls and November 10 CPI are landmines
Trading strategy
Steady bulls (main strategy):
Buy in batches at 85-86, stop loss below 82-83 (or effective daily break). First target 90-92, second target 95-98, partial take profit and hold to watch regulatory progress.
Aggressive short-term:
Buy on break and hold above 90, target 95+, stop loss below 88. If clearly breaks below 85 with volume, light short position possible, target 82-80, stop loss 87-88. Keep leverage within 5-8x, reduce or hedge ahead of unlock date due to volatility.
Long-term holders:
Core position can be held, buyback logic supports base position. But don’t go all-in, watch volatility around November 6. The real sting is: if you wait for a pullback to 80, you might get 90 instead.
HYPE now is like SOL in 2024—
99% of people think “it’s risen too much, wait for a pullback,” but once ICE got involved, it went straight from 80 to 98. Now it’s pulled back, and you’re afraid of unlocking.
$ETH $BTC $HYPE "Money is withdrawing, no rush to bottom guess! Don't fool yourself with K-line charts, capital flow is the most honest (￣▽￣)ゞ"
Stop staring at K-line charts looking for bottoms; capital movement is far more honest than drawing lines. Just take a look at this brutal flow data, the whole screen screams two words: retreat.
🔻 $BTC: Massive bleeding across the board
1.63 billion outflow in spot over 4 hours, 5.43 billion fleeing in contracts; looking longer term, over 102 billion outflow in contracts over 30 days! No spot support, leverage is being forcibly dismantled, a stabilization signal? Absolutely not. (｡•́︿•̀｡)
🔻 $ETH: Short-term “false warmth”
Although spot barely saw an inflow of 37.06 million in 4 hours, contracts still outflowed 171 million; spot outflow nearly 3.2 billion over 30 days. Some try to grab fire in the short term, but big money doesn’t look back, so the sustainability of this rebound is highly questionable.
🔻 $SOL: Cooking without rice
Both spot and contracts outflow in 4 hours; contracts outflow over 2.1 billion in 30 days. Spot selling pressure is slightly lighter by comparison, but leverage is also retreating—no rice, no cook, even a clever housewife can’t manage.
Intel summary:
The common problem for these three brothers now isn’t "who fell more," but a collective lack of incremental funds. As long as fresh spot liquidity doesn’t return, any current rally can only be seen as a technical "rebound," definitely not a reversal.
Strategy tone: Bearish bias, no rush to bottom pick!
Don’t shoot the eagle without seeing the rabbit; wait until capital truly shows its cards before acting. Hold your hands, don’t catch flying knives!
#美联储官员释放加息信号，12月预期仍存分歧 【Reddit Revenue Soars 53%, Stock Price Plummets 29%】
$xRDDT reported a 53% year-over-year revenue increase to $895 million, with net profit up 74%, yet its stock price plunged 29.22% on October 30, marking the largest single-day drop since its IPO. The market is concerned that AI is undermining the foundation of its future earnings.
Reddit's CEO revealed that in October, Google search referrals to the platform decreased by over 1 million per week on average, mainly due to Google AI. Previously, when users searched questions, Google $GOOGL would direct them to Reddit for discussions, allowing the platform to earn ad revenue from traffic; now AI directly summarizes answers, users leave after reading, and don’t even open Reddit. U.S. daily active users have dropped from 53.2 million in Q2 to 50.7 million, with pressure starting to show in the data.
Reddit’s Q4 revenue guidance midpoint is only $1.015 billion, below the market expectation of $1.05 billion. The company is even preparing to test restricting access for non-logged-in users, attempting to convert traffic into identifiable, monetizable registered users.
AI is not only creating new business but also redistributing internet traffic entry points. In the past, whoever controlled content could gain users through search; in the future, whoever controls the answers may capture those users. Reddit is just the first case harshly reminded by the market.
#Reddit暴跌近30%，AI搜索分流冲击显现 U.S. stocks and gold and silver fell sharply in sync, with safe-haven funds diverging. Gold could not stand alone; I judge the short-term trend to still be bearish, and discipline dictates following the trend without chasing rebounds. Both the four-hour and one-hour moving averages are declining, with the price falling more than seven points from the four-hour high. The low at 3,885.8 is just a step away. The sell orders in the previous ten units total 426,000, outweighing the buy orders of 130,000, with a buy-sell ratio of 0.31. The funding rate is zero, and open interest at 67,000 shows that bulls have not collapsed but there is no support either. A light short position can be tried near 3,896.5, with a stop loss at 3,903.8 and a target of 3,863.2; if it breaks below 3,885.8 and then rebounds without breaking that level, a short can also be taken with a stop loss at 3,899.4 and a target of 3,858.6. Single position size should not exceed 10%, and exit immediately if the level is broken, do not hold the position.
— This is only a personal opinion and does not constitute investment advice. Wishing you successful trading. —
$XAU#美股与金银同步大跌，避险资金流向分化
#美股与金银同步大跌，避险资金流向分化
$XAU $BTC has $110M of short liquidations just above $77,800, but sellers parked about $80M of orders at $78,500, right in the way. Below $77,000 sit $90M of long liquidations, and bids at $76,000 are thin. I lean toward a drop to $76,200 first. Which gets cleared first, the shorts or the longs?$1.151 billion locked, it looks like a store has a lot of money sitting on its books, but in business, I fear most the mistake of treating asset size as available cash. In this data from DefiLlama, Uniswap V4's TVL dropped about 20.5% over a week, with a 1.0% increase in a single day. This could be due to capital inflows and outflows or price changes, so it can't be read directly as a cash flow statement.
What I care more about is: in the liquidity provision business, is the input-output still profitable? My judgment is that this news has more operational significance for liquidity providers than it does as an indicator for short-term market trends. Having a large locked amount doesn't equal good business; the funds sitting there must be evaluated by whether the fee income can cover the risks taken.
If the reduction mainly reflects real withdrawals and trading demand hasn't decreased accordingly, then the remaining funds might earn more fees; but the trading depth of some pools could also thin out. This is my speculation; relying solely on total TVL can't determine which side has the advantage, nor can it confirm that less capital necessarily means more profit.
When I run a small company, I keep a risk reserve, and it's the same for these protocols: you can't allocate all funds based on ideal turnover rates. Business friends, if you are liquidity providers facing this kind of locked capital contraction, would you first recalculate the fee input-output or first increase the proportion of funds that can be accessed at any time? When I saw that big bearish candle on BTC this morning, my coffee suddenly lost its aroma. A $5,000 drop in one day—doesn't that make you panic? As soon as the news of Binance being hacked broke, the market almost instantly switched to risk-off mode. BTC plunged from 81,500 straight down to 76,300, wiping out $1.5 billion in leveraged long positions. That feeling wasn’t like a normal correction; it was more like someone suddenly shouted "Fire!" at a crowded door. What I pay most attention to when watching the market isn’t the size of the drop itself, but the way it falls—sharp, steep, without any rebound—indicating stop losses were triggered passively, not an active change of hands. But there’s a detail that’s easy to overlook: the 77,000 level is much cheaper than it was a month ago. In other words, panic selling is happening, but another group is starting to tentatively buy in. This doesn’t mean the bottom is in, but it shows that capital preference is slowly shifting from "run first, ask questions later" to "negotiate price carefully." This kind of shift usually doesn’t happen in a day, but it’s often a sign of a change in market rhythm. On the ETH side, it slid from 2,358 down to 2,245, nearly a 5% drop. The number of staked validators is still increasing, and the staking pool is expanding, but when the market crashes, these fundamentals are like umbrella ribs in the rain—they help, but can’t hold up the whole sky. 2,200 is the previous low; whether it holds depends on tomorrow. Reaching out to buy now is essentially betting that sentiment will stabilize before price does. I’d rather wait for a low-volume, stabilized bottom signal than show loyalty in the middle of a downtrend. SOL dropped from 102 to 95, nearly a 7% decline, altcoins...When discussing $BCH payments, the key is not the block size slogan but the actual settlement scenarios. Current market risk events make on-chain transfer demand worth observing, but large coin movements may just be risk-averse migrations. If merchant and daily payment data continue to expand, usage logic can be independent of speculation; if transaction volume falls back after the event hype subsides, the market will still price it according to its correlation with mainstream coins.First, consider the worst-case scenario: shorting while the price keeps rising, and if the stop loss isn't executed, losses could keep expanding. Core Trader 80 just opened a short position on UNI with 10x leverage, with a nominal position of about $50,000. I'm more concerned about how much drawdown he can withstand rather than rushing to judge whether the direction is right or wrong.
⚠️ Roughly calculating based on position size and leverage, the initial margin is about $5,000; if the price moves 5% against the position, the unrealized loss would be about $2,500, excluding fees, which would consume about half of the initial margin. Another risk is unclear capital exposure: without knowing the total account equity and margin mode, it's impossible to accurately calculate the liquidation distance or determine if this position is too large.
My risk control habit is to first convert the maximum tolerable loss per trade into a dollar amount, then verify the price fluctuation range corresponding to the position size. For ordinary people, this is more practical than just focusing on leverage multiples; since this new position hasn't concluded yet, I won't take the opening action as evidence of a bearish view. $UNI launched two new products this week, but the market didn't even react 😂
On the 22nd, UNI futures were listed on CME, and on the same day, Aggregator Hooks was launched to burn UNI with routing fees. On the 30th, Token Jar, a fee collection tool, was introduced.
v4 TVL reached $144 million, showing a clear increase within the month, with daily new addresses hitting 2,295, a four-year high. The product is truly evolving.
However, the price is still hovering around 6.85, not even reaching $7. Good mechanisms without pricing, a bit of a pity.
$ASTER's TVL dropped from a historical high of $2.464 billion to $777 million, shrinking by more than two-thirds. It clearly shows the chill of the DeFi winter.
ASTER's mechanism is aggressive, but the continuous TVL decline indicates adoption hasn't kept up with the story. I don't consider it a bottom during this window period.
On the $HYPE side, the treasury added funds (a $100 million buyback quota), but the spot market has sharply retreated. The perp market fundamentals remain unchanged; it's just a game between delegated holders and retail investors. My judgment: HYPE is still the perp king, but short-term price is dragged by leverage and sentiment, not because the fundamentals are bad.To pour some cold water first, LIT leading the gains does not mean the market has entered a broad rally mode. As of 14:00 Beijing time, according to Hyperliquid perpetual contract public quotes, among contracts with a 24-hour trading volume exceeding $20 million, LIT rose 16.31% to $3.17; ZRO rose 10.46%, while BTC and ETH only rose 0.81% and 1.22% respectively. My judgment is: this list looks more like a localized rally, and taking it as a signal of a comprehensive strengthening is easy to overread.
I'm not in a hurry to get excited, for two reasons. First, the gains are clearly differentiated; at the other end of the list, XPL fell 9.02%, indicating that strength has not covered all assets, and the enthusiasm for the leading coins cannot be directly extrapolated to the entire market. Second, this is a perpetual contract list with a trading volume threshold, which is neither a ranking of the entire market nor proof that incremental spot funds are continuously entering. Based on this snapshot alone, I can't tell if it's sustained buying or price fluctuations caused by short-term position adjustments.
Of course, localized strength could also be the starting point of a market spread; I'm not stubbornly bearish just to argue. If the number of strong assets expands later, BTC and ETH strengthen simultaneously, and spot trading volume supports it, I will change my view. Until then, what I’m watching is whether the rise can spread and continue, not the most eye-catching percentage at the top of the list. 75x short position floating profit 657%, this $SNDK wave was too delicious. On the night of the October 29 earnings report, I decisively opened a short at the high of 1277.
The logic is simple: SanDisk's Q1 performance exceeded expectations and announced a 1-for-8 stock split, but the next quarter guidance did not exceed buyers' expectations. Partner Kioxia directly warned that the price hike wave is cooling down, and the market instantly crashed.
The background is solid—NAND average price increase was cut from 70% to 25%, and concerns about the storage cycle peaking erupted. On October 30, there was a single-day plunge of 13.47%, with SanDisk dropping from 1330 to 1150.
Support below is seen at 1150. It is recommended to take profits in batches; the drop is too sharp and there may be an oversold rebound at any time. With 75x leverage, risk control must be well managed.
$BTC $ETH #美联储官员释放加息信号，12月预期仍存分歧 Meta's latest financial report is out. After reading it, the three numbers that impressed me the most are: Revenue of $64.6 billion, a year-over-year increase of 26%. Operating cash flow of $32.8 billion, still very strong. But quarterly capital expenditures reached $34.9 billion, turning free cash flow directly negative to -$2.1 billion. A company that earns a large amount of cash each quarter from advertising now finds that the operating cash flow it generates is no longer enough to cover capital expenditures. What exactly is Zuckerberg doing? ──── ✦ ──── First, looking at the advertising business, Meta indeed delivered a very strong report this time. Platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp reached 3.64 billion daily active users, a 3% year-over-year increase. User growth is no longer fast, but ad impressions grew by 10%, and the average ad price rose by 14%. These two numbers together are very interesting. Users only grew by 3%, yet both ad impressions and prices increased. This indicates that Meta is still extracting more commercial value from existing users. An important reason behind this is the continuous optimization of AI recommendation and advertising systems. Recommendations are more precise, users stay longer, ad matching efficiency improves, and advertisers are more willing to pay. Zuckerberg's investments in AI over the years have begun to reflect in the advertising business. This is also why I think Meta and Google are worth studying together. Google needs to consider how AI search will change traditional advertising models, while Meta has alreadyFrom the current funding rates, except for Ethereum and ZEC, the sentiment among other major coins remains bullish, which means after the waterfall drop, altcoins have strong rebound potential and their volatility far exceeds that of the leading Bitcoin.
This subtle shift likely indicates that some FOMO traders have given up bottom-fishing and started to short. If their positions are low, they are very likely to not withstand the rebound and suffer losses again Global assets collectively plummet, where is the real hidden danger?Let's all celebrate the CORE crash together
To be clear, this is self-mockery, not a short call. The star of the celebration is myself: fully leveraged 20x, cost 0.018, current price 0.01334, needs to rise 34.9% to break even (0.018÷0.01334−1). I'll pop the champagne first.
Screenshot from OKX at 15:51 today: CORE/USDT perpetual 0.01334, 24h −3.61%, high 0.01514, low 0.01323, amplitude 14.4% ((0.01514−0.01323)÷0.01323), volume 308 million tokens / 4.1154 million USDT. On the 1-hour chart, EMA5 0.01349, EMA10 0.01360, EMA20 0.01386, all three pressing down on the price, current price only 1.1% below the nearest EMA. MACD's DIFF −0.00036 just crossed above DEA −0.00038, histogram only 0.00002—this is underwater bleeding control, not a reversal.
Crashes also have scale. From the chart's high of 0.01565 to today's low of 0.01323, −15.5%. Coinranking's monthly close shows it was still $0.206 in October 2025, down 93.5% in a year. The worst part is the historical lows have changed three times in two days: 0.016358, 0.014337, and today 0.01323 (according to Script Home). The previous lows are not support, just draft lines being crossed out one by one.
But this drop isn't panic selling, it's a retreat. Price is down, but volume remains at the 4.1154 million level without shrinking, open interest steady at 1.13M with no large-scale liquidation—selling isn't rushed, holding can't sustain, but no one is stepping in. And it's not just CORE: in the same sector, Babylon locked nearly 30 days down 7%, Lombard −14.7%, Solv −8.2% (DefiLlama, Oct 29–31). Money in the sector is withdrawing overall; a small cap of tens of millions of dollars can't absorb it.
After celebrating, let's look at two lines. On the upside, EMA20 at 0.01386 needs a 3.9% rise to reach; reclaiming it with volume expansion could signal recovery; on the downside, 0.01323, breaking below leaves no historical anchor, only round numbers. The calendar still shows two dates: Nov 30 trading halt, Dec 30 withdrawal halt (Bithumb announcement).
I don't advise selling or holding. Just one mistake I'm making myself: don't add more funds to a fully leveraged account just to delay realizing losses—that's not margin top-up, it's putting more principal into the same timeline with a set date.
Comment below: when did you enter, at what price? I'll start, 0.018.
(This is my personal market observation, not investment advice.)$BTC Observation: Next week is typhoon week, yet Bitcoin is sunbathing at the 78,000 gate
Bitcoin only rose 0.8% in 24 hours, with a high-low difference of less than $800. Does this look like the calm before the storm?
Next week's calendar is packed: Tuesday is the US midterm elections, the same day as JOLTS job openings and the Reserve Bank of Australia's rate decision, with the market betting on a hike to 4.85%. Friday has the non-farm payrolls as the finale, expected at 65,000.
A statistic is quite sobering: from 2025 to September this year, the median volatility of Bitcoin within 30 minutes after non-farm payroll announcements is about twice the usual, while Fed rate decisions haven't stirred much of a wave.
Last month's non-farm was only 29,000. If the data improves this time, talk of a rate hike in December will resurface.
On the contracts side, the funding rate is 0.0068%, with perpetual positions at $2.7 billion. Neither longs nor shorts have heavily bet; everyone is just waiting for the weather forecast.
As someone currently at a loss, I'll just close the windows before the typhoon lands.20x short position +1376% unrealized profit in live trading. $AKE dropped from 0.03013 to 0.0094, riding the trend to capture big gains.
The logic is simple: this coin has extremely poor liquidity, with order book depth only a fraction of its market cap. After a large unlock in October, selling pressure surged, and even slightly large sell orders can trigger cliff-like crashes.
The background is an overall market volume contraction and risk appetite shrinkage, with altcoins hit first. Additionally, this coin was exposed for massive wash trading, so real buy orders can't hold it up. I decisively opened a short at 0.03013.
There is weak support around 0.009 in the short term. Operationally, it is recommended to reduce positions and take profits on dips, avoid high leverage and prolonged fights, and beware of stop-hunting reversals.
$ZEC $ETH #OKX、ICE与Trade.xyz联手，推动永续合约进入美国合规市场 To be honest, I don't quite understand: the meetings are held so intensively, two sessions in two days, with the central bank, the securities regulatory commission, and the financial regulatory authority taking turns, and all the brokers, funds, and banks are called in, yet not a single figure is mentioned.
How much is the quota? Unknown. Will the interest rate be adjusted? Unknown. When will it be implemented? Still unknown.
It's very much like the boss holding meetings for two consecutive days, calling all the key staff into the conference room, and after the meeting, the group chat only sends one sentence: "The direction is clear." The direction is clear, but I still have no answer on whether to move $BTC. No hints for $ETH either.
It's not that this isn't positive news, but this kind of positive news is only enough to support sentiment, not enough to support positions. A rebound does not mean the funds have returned
Money is still flowing out of BTC and ETH, while SOL is seeing inflows.
Where is this money coming from:
BTC contracts have a net outflow of 157 million, and spot outflow of 43.09 million.
Both markets moving out together indicates that the replenishment is from the original holders, not new money.
How is this calculated:
SOL contracts outflow 6.47 million, spot inflow 40.79 million.
Leverage is withdrawing, spot is buying, so the net inflow is 34.32 million.
The three moving in two directions on the same day is information in itself.
$BTC failing to reclaim 78,000 means this wave can only be considered a correction.
$SOL holding 94 is necessary for the next leg.
Wait for BTC to reclaim 78,000, then see if funds follow.
#BTC continues to oscillate, subsequent trends influenced by multiple factors
#$BTC $SOL The regulatory schedule is quite tight: on the morning of November 2, the central bank and the securities regulatory commission will first hold a meeting, inviting brokers and funds; on November 3, the central bank will again join the Financial Regulatory Administration and the securities commission to call together major banks. Two days, two meetings, three departments.
But the publicly stated keywords are all "hold symposiums," "study promotion," and "study optimization." There are no details on tool scale, re-lending quotas, interest rate ranges, or even a timeline for implementation. The attitude is fully conveyed, but not a single detail is leaked.
This is a typical information asymmetry structure: the policy side conveys intentions through meeting density, while the market can only use those intentions to infer parameters. The November 2 meeting talks about "supporting the use of capital market-related tools," focusing on "promotion" and "tools"—not just calling again to boost confidence, but to actually get the tools in hand moving. The November 3 meeting shifts to re-lending linked to repos and increased holdings, with the focus more likely on coverage scope and operational procedures rather than finalizing the amount on the spot.
Mechanically, it’s worth thinking one layer deeper: the repo-increased holdings re-lending channel is custom-made for market support, where the central bank provides low-cost funds to banks, and banks then support repos and increased holdings. Once this process smooths out, the beneficiaries won’t be all assets but large-cap varieties that can be captured by the repo narrative—$BTC sentiment will react first, $ETH and $BNB will lag slightly, and the direction still depends on whether executable parameters appear in the detailed rules.
So what’s more worth watching is whether an assessable arrangement can be formed after the meetings. Information asymmetry doesn’t create price increases; it only determines who acts first. Apple Fiscal Year 2026 Q4 Earnings Preview
Market consensus expects revenue of approximately $113.322 billion (year-over-year +10.6%), EPS of $1.979 (year-over-year +6.97%). However, institutional opinions diverge significantly: Goldman Sachs forecasts revenue of $113.598 billion and EPS of $2.01, slightly exceeding expectations, raising the target price to $390; Bank of America warns of a "modeling error" on Wall Street, expecting revenue of $113 billion and EPS of $1.97, with a target price of $370.
The core disagreement lies in the impact of the staggered iPhone release. The Pro/Duo series launching in September supports part of Q4 growth, but the absence of the base model leads to a 4% year-over-year decline in shipments, compensated by a 20% increase in average selling price to "trade price for volume." The key point is that the price increase benefits can only be half confirmed in Q4, while rising memory costs have already started to erode gross margin; full profit realization will wait until the December quarter. Therefore, Bank of America believes the market's revenue expectations for the December quarter are too high and lowers the fiscal year 2027 iPhone shipment forecast to 247 million units (Wall Street expectation is 260 million).
#苹果新CEO迎来iPhone18首份成绩单 Binance risk shows substantial easing: On November 1, AFP cited a Binance announcement stating that the BTC network has taken the lead in resuming withdrawals; this goes beyond the previous mere capital replenishment promise, reducing the tail risk BTC faces due to platform freezes and liquidity contagion. It cannot be concluded from this that ETH withdrawals have also resumed.
Binance also stated that the coin replenishment ratio has increased to 95%. The strongest opposing view is: phased reopening has not yet been tested under sustained withdrawal pressure, a full reserve proof is still pending, and potential selling pressure from attackers has not disappeared, so it is insufficient to turn bullish. Next, attention will focus on the actual opening of networks like ETH, whether withdrawal processing is smooth, and the reserve verification expected to be completed on November 3 (UTC).