Orbit Post Sitemap
To summarize yesterday's thoughts, I said SanDisk rising to 1380 and Hynix to 1080 both have a profit margin of about 10%.
Crude oil shorted at 103, seeing 98-99, with a low drop to 99.5.
Bitcoin is preparing to consider shorting at 82200-83000 but hasn't reached the range yet.
From the moment Anthropic's profits burst the AI bubble, I knew SanDisk and Hynix would rise.
The core reason is that AI capital investment peaked earlier + contract liquidations fell too sharply, and the panic selling was too fierce, causing excessive downside, so any positive news will trigger a rebound to repair.
The rebound is a window before the midterm elections, not a signal to chase highs.
1. On the AI storage side:
After a short-term surge, don't chase the rise. SanDisk faces strong resistance in the 1420-1450 range, and Hynix's resistance is at 1150-1180, both previous high-volume zones, easy to pull back upon touching. Capital is very likely to reduce positions before the elections, and risk-off sentiment will come quickly.
2. On the Bitcoin side:
The Nasdaq recovery and AI sector takeoff have just driven Bitcoin to surge near 81000 last night. The higher the rebound, the better the short entry. The main entry timing is still 82200-83000. Crude oil's macro pressure hasn't eased, and midterm election uncertainty remains. Risk-off decline is still in play.
Take profits on this 10% rebound in AI storage; just don't mistake the repair rebound for a reversal signal.BTC surged to $80,800 then pulled back, with 874,000 coins locked above forming a strong resistance — rotation hasn't started yet, funds are just hesitating at the door.
$BTC: $80,878. After peaking at $80,819, it faced pressure and retreated to the Bollinger middle band. The $81,000 to $82,500 range concentrates about 874,000 BTC cost basis here; after breaking below $81,300, this level has turned from support into resistance. Above $87,000, locked positions have twice suppressed rallies this year. Although ETF funds saw a single-day inflow of $110 million, mainly concentrated in IBIT, other products remained mostly flat. Full recovery of spot demand is yet to be confirmed.
$ETH: $2,354.85. BTC dominance is 60.49%, still 2.5 percentage points above the 58% threshold that would trigger altcoin rotation. ETH is more passively following BTC rather than acting as an independent rotation driver.
$SOL: $101.54. The SOL/BTC rate did not hit new highs during BTC's surge. Earlier inflation reduction proposals have been priced in advance; currently, SOL is in a consolidation phase after clearing positive news.
Summary: As long as BTC dominance doesn't fall below 58%, rotation is a false premise. Funds haven't exited but haven't dispersed either — waiting for macro signals to provide the next direction.
#BTC冲高回落，市场轮动开始了吗？ Solana (SOL) real-time price: approximately $101
As of today, SOL is trading near $101, with a slight 24-hour increase of about 0.4%, following the overall market trend but lacking independent momentum.
· Ecosystem fundamentals show highlights but struggle to translate into price: Solana's on-chain RWA market cap has grown from $700 million to $4.3 billion within a year, and third-quarter application revenue increased about 48% quarter-over-quarter to $299 million. However, revenue heavily depends on trading activity, and ecosystem growth has yet to convert into a clear price breakout.
· ETF funds continue to bleed: SOL spot ETFs have seen net outflows for three consecutive weeks, with about $8.23 million withdrawn on October 26 alone, mainly contributed by Bitwise's BSOL. Without a shift in capital flow, technical positives are unlikely to independently support the market.
· Key technical levels: SOL is currently caught between the 50-day moving average (around $106) and the 200-day moving average (around $98). The $95–$100 range below is the last demand zone; breaking below it could open up a larger downside.
· Macro pressure: The Federal Reserve announced its interest rate decision today, with the market expecting no change, but the liquidity-scarce environment for altcoins is unlikely to improve in the short term.
In summary: Ecosystem data is not bad, but with continuous ETF fund outflows and macro uncertainty, SOL is precarious around the $100 mark. Holding above $95 is the bottom line. An $ETH OG associated with #EthereumFoundation sold 7,594 $ETH (worth $17.79 million) after being inactive for a year.
This OG bought 200,000 $ETH during the ICO at $0.31 each (costing $61,000) and received 42,654 $ETH from #EthereumFoundation when the $ETH trading price was $13.82. Lookonchain Weekly Report for October 19-25, 2026: Funds Are Flowing Out of the Market.
Stablecoin prices have dropped, decentralized exchange trading volumes have decreased, but only publicly listed companies continue steadily accumulating Bitcoin.
• Stablecoin market capitalization decreased by $2.19 billion.
• Compared to the previous week, spot trading volume on DEXs fell by 12.21%, and per-share trading volume dropped by 8.59%.
• Protocol revenue declined by 10.57%, while Central City’s revenue astonishingly increased by 14,393%.
• Two publicly listed companies collectively purchased an additional 6,202 Bitcoins ($494.23 million).
• This strategy neither bought nor sold Bitcoin this week, while Bitmine additionally acquired 10,452 Ethereum ($24.13 million).
I believe the nearly $2.2 billion outflow from the stablecoin market is a bad sign; funds are leaving the market and have not yet returned. However, since enterprises are still steadily accumulating, I think the market bottom should not be far off. It’s just that retail investors feel discouraged, leading to a drop in trading volume. I’m not ready to go all in yet; I will wait for a reversal in stablecoin fund flows before making a decision.
People are speculating whether funds have truly been withdrawn or are just waiting to see the Federal Reserve Open Market Committee’s moves. $BTC Ripple has obtained the U.S. national trust bank license, and XRP only rose a little over 2 points this morning.
On October 26, the U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency gave Ripple the final approval for the national trust bank.
It can manage RLUSD reserves and do digital asset custody, but it cannot accept deposits or make loans.
RLUSD currently has a market value of about $2.5 billion.
XRP was around 1.33 this morning, up about 2.7% in 24 hours.
I think this license directly benefits RLUSD, not XRP.
Transferring RLUSD on Ethereum doesn't require XRP, and on the XRP ledger it only consumes a small amount of fees.
So a 2-point rise is reasonable; the market doesn't see this as a big positive for XRP.
The Fed's interest rate decision is tonight, and PCE inflation data comes tomorrow night; chasing news now isn't worthwhile.
I choose to observe, not chase.
If it breaks and holds above 1.40, which is last week's high, it means funds are truly repricing the bank license, and my judgment would be wrong.
If it falls back below 1.27, it means this news has already been fully priced in.
Do you think this license will ultimately benefit XRP, or only RLUSD?
A. Yes, it will eventually affect XRP
B. No, these are two separate matters
$XRP
#XRP #Ripple #FedRateDecision Attendance sheet: Only one person clocks in daily. On the 27th, 305.81 BTC spot coins were bought, with the entire family inactive; two days ago, only one family moved 1376.78 coins, volume shrank by nearly 80%. Detailed breakdown: which family bought how many coins, no total number tricks. Every day one family moves, switching families, sporadic probing, not collective. The foundation hasn't collapsed: 721,800 coins, daily 300 is just a drizzle, no sign of a run. Market: BTC hovers above 80,000, ETH hovers, SOL holds 100, ZEC leads with nearly 6%. The whole network is evenly split, liquidations at 149 million, no heavy bets. FOMC decision comes early Thursday, everyone waits calmly with over 700,000 coins; short-term no chasing, no second family following as a probe. Conditions: I will acknowledge only if multiple families buy for two consecutive days and volume returns to thousands; if single-day turns negative with multiple families selling together, first reduce positions.Brothers, just by looking at the liquidation data, you can immediately understand how exhausting the current market is.
BTC's total network liquidations in the past 24 hours are less than 80 million, which is not even close to the scale of previous liquidation events that often reached billions. Considering the recent ETF fund fluctuations (BlackRock standing alone, FBTC/ARKB outflows), October still shows a net outflow overall. The macro expectation of "higher interest rates lasting longer" is suppressing the market, and with the FOMC decision just around the corner, both bulls and bears are waiting and watching. ETH is no different; the 80,000 level is crowded with leverage but no big moves are happening.
What does this mean? Whether long or short, neither side can make a significant move. No one can completely crush the opponent, so there’s no big surge or plunge. Simply put, it’s just existing funds tugging back and forth inside, with no new money coming in from outside. BTC is oscillating between 80,450 and 81,300, sweeping stop losses back and forth, specifically targeting those playing with high leverage.
This kind of market is the most frustrating—looks like it’s about to break out but then turns back down. Don’t open positions frequently during this phase, and keep leverage light. Grinding sideways is the easiest way to break your mindset and lose money repeatedly without realizing it. Be patient and wait; only when liquidation scale expands (like when the FOMC shoe drops) can we expect a decent market move. $SOL is also dragged down by the overall environment, and altcoins have an even harder time holding up. $BTC $ETH $ZEC Meme coins were once Solana's "stress test" to prove its high throughput and low-cost capabilities. Now that their share has significantly declined, it indicates that on-chain activity is "deflating," which is beneficial for the long-term narrative. However, the issue is whether stable, high-quality trading volume can pick up after speculative trading decreases. Currently, we see a clear drop in the share of perpetual contracts, while specialized derivative chains like Hyperliquid continue to dominate the on-chain perps space.
On-chain perps are a high-value, high-friction market that demands extremely low latency, deep market making, and robust risk engines. Solana has long led in spot DEXs but has lagged relatively behind in perps. Its share dropped from 17% to 6%, reflecting both the decline in leveraged trading after the Meme craze and the fact that Solana's perp platforms have not significantly expanded their advantage against Hyperliquid. Some historically high trading volumes may also include points/airdrop farming components, so the real organic trading volume needs to be viewed more soberly.
Institutional progress is indeed underway: stablecoins, tokenized assets, and payment settlements have all made tangible advances. Solana's speed and cost advantages are attractive for institutional high-frequency settlements and tokenized stocks/assets. However, current price pressure and ETF outflows indicate the market is waiting for more solid "non-speculative" revenue and user stickiness. The overall crypto market downturn also amplifies the growing pains during this transition period.When I look at prediction markets in the crypto space, if I encounter messages like "it's already decided internally," I first check what conditions they use for settlement. Does a project announcement count, or only when the feature actually goes live? This is really different from just watching the coin price rise and fall. Even if the news is true, it doesn't necessarily correspond to the outcome in the question. When the odds move, I can't tell if it's insider money coming in or if everyone is just convinced by that screenshot. And of course, the screenshot often has the source cropped out, which is just annoying.$8.965 billion, a quarter-on-quarter increase of 51%, non-GAAP earnings per share of $39.25, exceeding the market expectation of $34.96. Full-year revenue reached $20.248 billion, a year-on-year growth of 175%, which is no longer just ordinary performance growth but a clear reflection of the storage industry's significant recovery. Data center revenue in Q4 reached $2.977 billion, a quarter-on-quarter increase of 103%, with AI infrastructure construction driving demand for high-performance storage into actual revenue. Meanwhile, the company expects next quarter's revenue to be between $10.3 billion and $10.8 billion, with no obvious signs of performance growth slowing down yet. However, it should be noted that SanDisk's growth comes not only from shipment volume but also from price increases in storage products. If price hikes slow down later or AI capital expenditures fall short of expectations, profit margins may also come under pressure. SanDisk's fundamentals are indeed strong, but whether the stock price can continue to rise depends on whether the next earnings report can again exceed expectations. The company plans to announce its fiscal 2027 Q1 results on October 29, which is the key catalyst to watch next. For these AI storage stocks that have already risen significantly, I tend to focus more on performance realization and opportunities after pullbacks rather than simply chasing earnings report positives. #SanDiskMSCIRebalanceEffective, NAND valuation under focus A 30 million retracement is no cause for panic; first, look at the whale's moat
This bullish whale has a 30 million floating profit retracement in 24 hours, with three long positions shrinking: BTC retraced 12.8 million, ETH retraced 9.2 million, SOL retraced 8 million. On the surface, it looks pressured, but don't rush to call it dangerous — this whale has accumulated profits exceeding 220 million USD at the bottom of this round, so the retracement is just profit-taking, not a capital emergency.
Looking at the base: BTC long 1,850 coins, nominal 150 million, 4x leverage, average price 64,200; ETH long 78,000 coins, nominal 180 million, 4x leverage, average price 3,180; SOL long 550,000 coins, nominal 56 million, 5x leverage, average price 132. Total nominal nearly 400 million, low leverage, able to withstand volatility.
Looking at stop-loss: BTC about 48,000, ETH about 2,100, SOL about 85, regular shakeouts unlikely to hit the bottom line. It bets on trend continuation with low leverage, not high leverage risking everything.
Conclusion: There are whale long positions supporting the bottom, but the real test is not the retracement, but whether macro liquidity turns. Whether to follow or not, don't just focus on price fluctuations; first look at risk control boundaries.
BTC ETH SOL #ThisWeekFocus November Nonfarm Data #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ #MiddleEastSituationEasing #CanCrudeOilCrashBenefitRiskAssets?From 25 million to 1.5 billion USD: What are the "necessary conditions" for CORE coin to hit the $1 mark?
Currently, the circulating supply of CORE is about 1.5 billion tokens, priced at $0.017, with a market cap of approximately 25 million USD; to reach $1, the market cap needs to expand to 1.5 billion USD, requiring multiple conditions to be met simultaneously, none of which can be missing. Necessary condition ①: Network security stabilizes
Independent validators stop withdrawing, their numbers rebound, and the market re-recognizes the security of the Satoshi Plus consensus. Only when the risk of network decentralization is eliminated will large Bitcoin holders dare to stake BTC on a large scale into the Core ecosystem, which is the foundation of the BTCFi narrative.
Necessary condition ②: Ghost chip sell pressure is absorbed
69 million ghost chips cannot be dumped in a concentrated manner during the price rise; the chips must be gradually absorbed by the market to eliminate the largest unpredictable sell pressure bomb on the way up. Necessary condition ③: Core products launch, revenue flywheel runs, SatPay officially goes live, on-chain fees and buyback mechanisms are implemented, no longer relying solely on narrative; ecosystems like Middle East's Nawa Finance continue to bring new BTC staking funds, and TVL achieves significant growth. Necessary condition ④: BTCFi sector bull market + winning competition in the sector
BTCFi becomes the main theme of this bull market, CORE competes with rivals like Babylon and Stacks to capture a large market share and attract institutional capital entry. Conclusion first: $INTC is up 4.5% today, but the trouble with tokenized stocks isn't the market—26 US-listed companies have formally opposed others tokenizing their stocks, up from 9 two weeks ago, meaning about 41% of 62 companies have withdrawn.
Announcement on 10-27: ICE and OKX's US holding company joint venture OKXICE added Intel, Oracle, IBM, and IonQ to the list of opponents.
The key sentence to note: Tokens represent a claim right against the real stocks held by a third-party tokenizer through a registered broker; whether your self-custodied tokens count as client property and are protected by SIPC if the broker goes bankrupt is uncertain.
Your X-tokenized stocks on OKX are a different matter: OKX's announcement states they are provided by xStocks, running on Solana and X Layer, and do not represent equity ownership.
Wallet accounting: $INTC perpetual 24h trading volume is 230,000 contracts ≈ $20.9 million, while XINTC spot turnover is only $1.02 million, a 20x difference.
My judgment: The bottleneck is no longer whether stocks can be put on-chain, but who is qualified to package your stocks. Ask three questions first: who truly custodies the real stocks, whether broker bankruptcy counts as client property, and whether LPs can withdraw anytime.
Would you hold a token with an unclear claim right just for 24-hour trading? $INTC Chip stocks are being sold, essentials are being bought. The Philadelphia Semiconductor Index dropped about 12% in a month, with a maximum drawdown close to 15%. Meanwhile, the S&P 500 itself fell less than 1%. Is that surprising? Not really—the index is being carried by big tech like Nvidia, while most stocks are actually rising. The equal-weighted S&P rose 2.5%, while the regular S&P fell 0.9%. September was still a win for the giants, but in October, ordinary stocks led by four points. Such a monthly reversal is rare even when looking back to 1990. $SPY Where did the money go? Energy rose 13%, consumer staples rose 9%. Pools, RVs, yachts—things no one mentioned before, all performed well last week. $QQQ Now stuck in a midterm election year. Historically, this year is the weakest for the stock market, but late October often marks a phase low; in the year after the election, the S&P has risen 19 times. However, in 2018, it kept falling until just before Christmas, so these patterns are only references, not signals. $NVDA To put it simply: it’s not necessarily that AI is over, it’s more like a style shift—from a few giants to a broader market. Going forward, watch two things: whether it can hold by month-end, and whether chips will continue to drag. #ThisWeekOctoberFOMCRateDecisionWillBeAnnounced Galaxy announces the end of the bear market in June! Are Bitcoin bears really going to be proven wrong this time? $BTC
The market is still debating whether Bitcoin has entered a bear market, but Galaxy Research has made a rather bold judgment: the Bitcoin bear market may have already ended in June.
Galaxy's reasons include: $BTC reclaiming the 50-week moving average, a slowdown in selling by long-term holders, and macro background changes brought by the continuous rise of U.S. debt.
These signals together are indeed worth serious study.
First, the reduction in selling by long-term holders means the potential selling pressure in the market may be easing. Second, if Bitcoin can sustain above the 50-week moving average, the medium to long-term trend has a chance to gradually improve.
As for the U.S. debt issue, it reinforces some investors' demand for allocation to scarce assets, but this does not necessarily mean that a weaker dollar or increased debt will inevitably drive $BTC higher.
What I dislike most is the market declaring the bull market over whenever prices fall, and immediately announcing a new super bull market whenever prices rise. The market is not that simple; truly valuable judgments must tell you both the reasons to be bullish and the reasons why that view might be wrong #10月FOMC利率决议即将公布 #SK海力士Q3营收首破100万亿韩元 #RobinhoodQ3营收增长，净利润下降 Core Trader 100 (0x82f6bb…512ec) closed all $SOXL short positions with 10x leverage, realizing a loss of $35,742.42. This position has already exited, but what I’m more interested in studying is: can the loss exit be written into a rule in advance? 🤖
If I were to write it as a strategy, I would first try this: "If the price moves 2% against the entry price, close all positions, no temporary relaxation." This is a hypothetical condition I’m researching for myself; it doesn’t mean this address follows it, nor that 2% is the optimal parameter.
The average entry price was $100.1526, the exit price was $102.6687, the price moved approximately 2.51% against the position upwards. Roughly calculating with 10x leverage, the margin-level loss is about 25.1%, excluding fees and other impacts. My judgment is that leveraged positions should first set a loss budget before discussing directional confidence; otherwise, small price deviations can turn into big wounds.
The advantage of this rule is that the exit condition is clear, reducing the "wait a bit longer" bargaining. The drawbacks are obvious: a fixed 2% is not suitable for all volatility environments and may cause frequent stop losses; if slippage occurs, the actual loss may exceed the budget.
I’m still struggling with how to set the threshold. If you were to write this short position exit condition, would you choose a 2% price reversal or a 20% margin loss? Would you add a volatility condition as well? After ETH surged to $2700, it quickly retreated, with staking volume hitting a new high of 43.16 million tokens, but spot ETFs saw a net outflow of nearly $90 million in a single day. On-chain tokens are increasingly locked up, yet on-exchange funds are withdrawing, exposing a severe divergence in capital flow during this rally.
$ETH is quoted at 2,356.14. Staking accounts for nearly 36%, but the yield has dropped to around 2.46%, unable to retain hot money in a high-interest environment. ETF outflows indicate institutions are cashing out short-term, and the historical selling pressure above 2700 requires stronger incremental volume to absorb.
$BTC is quoted at 80,899.9. The largest marginal buyer on the enterprise side (Strategy) has paused additional purchases and shifted to repurchasing preferred shares. The high interest rate environment raises the opportunity cost of non-interest-bearing assets, and the repeated tug-of-war around the 80,000 mark reflects macroeconomic pressure.
$SOL is quoted at 101.56. Recently, about 480,000 SOL were transferred by whales to exchanges, indicating real selling pressure. As a high-beta asset, before macro uncertainties settle, the $100 level is easily dragged down by the broader market.
Summary
Staking lock-up is a slow variable, ETF outflow is a fast signal. When staking yields fail to outperform risk-free rates, locked tokens cannot prevent capital from exiting for risk aversion before macro conditions stabilize. Under this divergence, defense is paramount.
#ETH冲高2700美元，质押与资金面现分化 🚨 Robinhood's performance hits a record high, but its crypto business has been slashed significantly! Where has the trading heat in the crypto world gone?
Robinhood's latest earnings report is out! Q3 total net revenue reached $1.42 billion, up 12% year-over-year, setting a new single-quarter record; net profit, however, fell 14% year-over-year. The most notable point is that crypto trading revenue was only $120 million, a sharp 55% year-over-year drop, with trading volume down 38%.
🧠 Simply put: not all business is cooling down; rather, users' money and attention are shifting elsewhere. As crypto trading cools, event contracts, stocks, and options are heating up, indicating the platform's revenue is no longer solely supported by crypto trading. Meanwhile, Robinhood's self-built chain's first full quarter of DEX trading volume exceeded $80 billion, with on-chain fees surpassing $50 million. Traditional trading platforms are also accelerating their on-chain deployments.
🔥 My take: The most interesting aspect of this earnings report is the simultaneous "decline in crypto trading revenue" and "expansion of on-chain business." In the short term, weakening retail trading enthusiasm may pressure market sentiment; in the long term, the platform is still competing for the gateway to on-chain trading and asset tokenization.
So don't just be bearish because of revenue decline, nor be bullish just because on-chain data looks good. What really needs watching is when funds return to crypto trading and whether on-chain growth can translate into sustained real demand. 👀$DOGE $ETH $XAU Two sums of money are telling the same story, but most people only focus on the price. On-chain data shows that since October 12, large addresses have cumulatively increased their holdings by about 600 million $DOGE, while around $0.081 there is approximately 36 billion in transaction chips concentrated; almost at the same time, asset management firm SIGFIG disclosed that its clients increased their holdings of about $73 million in Bitcoin ETFs in Q3, with funds coming from retail accounts at banks such as Wells Fargo, Citizens, Santander, and UBS. One is whales quietly adding positions on-chain, the other is client funds from traditional banking channels continuously flowing in. Both paths actually point to the same thing: incremental funds are entering this market through different entry points. What is truly worth pondering is not who is buying more, but the difference in the nature of the funds. On the $DOGE side, it is typical large-holder behavior, with chips highly concentrated in a specific price range, meaning $0.081 has transformed from an ordinary transaction zone into a cost boundary line between bulls and bears; on the $BTC side, it is the allocation demand from asset management channels, with retail funds indirectly holding ETFs through bank platforms. This buying rhythm is slow and sticky, and will not retreat just because of a single bearish candle. These two types of funds, one fast and one slow, happen to form two fulcrums of the market structure. But there is an easily overlooked time difference here. SIGFIG's data belongs to Q3, reflecting allocation actions from several months ago, and cannot be directly equated with current new buying; while the $DOGE increase is an on-chain change after October 12, with stronger timeliness. Mixing the two easily leads toETH was fully transferred to the exchange 3 hours ago, valued at 11.59 million USD. This whale spent 31,000 USD 11 years ago to subscribe to 100,000 ETH through an ICO, previously sold 50,000 ETH at 5.47 USD each, currently still holds 45,000 ETH, valued at about 105 million USD; this time sold 5,000 ETH at 2,320 USD each. #VoiceOfTrading: Your experience deserves to be heard $BTC $ETH $CORE decentralized block production is one thing. Having the same group controlling partnerships, the Maple lawsuit (settled under confidentiality, with no public benefit to holders), chaotic reward issuance, and a large amount of remaining distribution exit on one side while handing over a depleted token to the community is another.
You have ignored fundamental issues about liquidity, token distribution, and accountability for months. Contributors quietly remove Core from their profiles, and the price hovers near historic lows. This does not look like a planned handover but more like an exit. Independent validators running blocks do not transfer control over the remaining contributors, reserves, and treasury tokens, which can still influence the market.
If this is truly community-led now, then disclose wallet-level transparency of the remaining distribution and stop treating silence + slogans as progress. Otherwise, this is just the latest repackaging of damage caused by an escape.Today, October 28, the market will face two important policy decisions: the Bank of Canada will announce its interest rate decision and monetary policy report, and the Federal Reserve will announce its interest rate decision and hold a press conference. Ajian will directly guide everyone through a quick judgment framework and position suggestions:
First, you need to know that the market is not only concerned about whether the interest rate changes this time; in fact, most of it has already been anticipated and priced in. The main focus is still on the assessment of inflation, economic growth, and the future policy path. Because even if the central bank keeps the interest rate unchanged, if the statement or press conference releases stronger inflation concerns, the market may still reprice the future rate cut space, and crypto assets will directly come under pressure; conversely, even if there is no immediate rate cut, as long as the policy guidance is more moderate than market expectations, it may ease the pressure on risk assets.
So today, key points to observe are:
1. How the Federal Reserve describes inflation risks
2. Whether there is any change in the description of the future policy path
3. The actual reaction of the US dollar and US Treasury yields after the decision
4. Whether BTC follows risk assets or shows an independent trend
It is especially important to note that although the overall market is showing a rebound trend driven by $BTC, before the decision is announced, all of this can only be regarded as market expectations and does not represent trend confirmation. Remember, truly valuable trading opportunities often lie not in guessing a number correctly but in judging the gap between the final result and market expectations.
That is all, DYOR# The October FOMC interest rate decision will be announced this week #谷歌云业务增长82%，AI投入回报如何？
So far, the near- to mid-term returns on Google's AI investments have been quite solid (Cloud's high growth and high profit margin + short payback period + relatively high incremental ROIC), the search moat remains, and the full-stack layout has advantages. This is not "burning money with no returns," but a typical characteristic of a large-scale infrastructure phase—first investing heavily to build capacity, then recovering through long-term contracts and economies of scale. Investors are more concerned about whether the backlog can continue to be converted into profits and gradually restore stronger free cash flow after 2027. Data is based on financial reports and analysis from mid to late 2026, with subsequent quarters (especially CapEx guidance and Cloud profit margins) expected to further validate this.After the $HOOD Q3 earnings report, I went long.
Revenue hit a record $1.424 billion, adjusted EPS of 0.60 beat expectations. Net profit declined mainly due to a $67 million unrealized loss, not an issue with the core business.
Bullish points lie in the structure: prediction market revenue $173 million, surpassing crypto for the first time; options up 31%, Gold subscriptions hit a new high of 5.2 million, net inflows $16 billion. Robinhood Chain earned $26 million in its first quarter.
Shares fell 5.5% after hours to $89; I think the market only focused on profit, not the structure. Prediction market + Gold + Chain are the real growth engines for HOOD's next phase.
Small position long, stop loss if it falls below 85. #RobinhoodQ3营收增长，净利润下降 $SKHY Report Time: 2026-10-28 10:40 (Beijing Time) | Earnings Release: 2026-10-28 Pre-market (Seoul) | Data as of the release date
1. Key Conclusions
Partially exceeded expectations: both revenue and operating profit surpassed estimates, but net profit was significantly below. Revenue broke 100 trillion KRW for the first time, operating profit exceeded the most aggressive institutional forecasts; however, net profit (including Kioxia investment book fluctuations) was about 33% below consensus. Market reaction was positive (KOSPI +2.2% at open, SK Hynix up nearly 3%), but the stock price has retraced nearly 60% from the June high. The key focus is on the sustainability of HBM price increases in 2027 rather than the current quarter's figures.
2. Actual vs Market Expectations (Q3 2026, K-IFRS, unaudited)
Metric Actual Market Consensus Result
Operating Revenue 104.62 trillion KRW 98.2~98.96 trillion ✅ Exceeded expectations (first time over 100 trillion, +32% QoQ, +328% YoY)
Operating Profit 83.33 trillion KRW 77.5 trillion (aggressive forecast 80.1 trillion) ✅ Exceeded expectations (+38% QoQ, +632% YoY, operating margin 80%)
Net Profit 39.78 trillion KRW 59.66 trillion ❌ About 33% below (up 216% YoY, down 58% QoQ)
Note: The net profit shortfall is mainly due to non-operating factors such as the Kioxia investment.From a macro perspective, I am more concerned about whether new funds are entering the market rather than which story is running fast. PANews, citing SoSoValue data, reported that the crypto sector generally rose, with the Meme sector up 3.78% in 24 hours, the NFT sector up 3.32%; the news headline also mentioned that the AI sector fell more than 6%.
My judgment is that this is not enough to be considered a signal of a comprehensive liquidity warming. Sector gains are not net capital inflows and cannot be equated directly; the strength of Meme and weakness of AI also indicate that risk appetite is not expanding synchronously. My speculation is that if it is just existing funds switching hotspots, then local excitement can last for a while but may not support the valuation of the entire market.
I tend to view this as a structural market rather than hastily labeling the macro environment as "loosening." Going forward, I will watch whether capital inflows can continue, so as not to mistake fund relocation for new money entering the market. 但还不能急着判断反转。BTC现货和合约短线同步流入，ETH杠杆资金回补更明显，SOL则是现货承接、合约仍在撤退。 BTC现货4小时净流入1.11亿美元，合约净流入3618万美元。拉长至24小时，现货净流入1.79亿美元，但合约净流出9274万美元。30天合约净流出扩大至78.3亿美元，说明短线买盘回来了，中期去杠杆还没有结束。 ETH现货4小时净流入5164万美元，合约净流入2.21亿美元。24小时现货净流入8702万美元，合约净流入1.85亿美元。不过30天现货净流出37.7亿美元，合约净流出82.9亿美元。短线回补力度强于BTC，但中期资金结构依旧偏弱。 SOL现货4小时净流入866万美元，合约净流入453万美元。24小时现货净流入2370万美元，合约却净流出5894万美元。30天合约累计净流出21.7亿美元，说明现货有人接，但杠杆资金对反弹仍然谨慎。 BTC短线资金回流，ETH合约资金抢跑，SOL现货承接最明显。现在更像连续撤退后的资金回补，还不是趋势反转。继续看反弹能否带来持续增量，否则冲高后仍有回落风险。Don't get scared to the point of peeing yourself by this news.
Dropping such explosive news about an imminent war right before the election is a typical politician's tactic, deliberately creating panic to pull votes.
Look, the news even says Trump himself hasn't signed anything yet; this is just all talk and no action.
If a real war breaks out, oil prices will skyrocket, and inflation in the US will explode—how could the election even happen then?
So most likely, this is just a lot of noise with little action, extreme pressure to force Iran to back down.
If you're scared and start cutting losses or chasing high prices in gold and oil, chances are the big players are using the news to scalp retail investors. Don't scare yourself unnecessarily.🔍 After losing, the position was completely closed at once. Is it admitting a mistake, or withdrawing from the battlefield first? The wallet I’m monitoring, 0x82f6bb…512ec, has closed all $SOXL short positions with 10x leverage, with a closing amount of about $1,458,500, realizing a loss of $35,742.42.
An interesting detail here: the opening average price was $100.1526, the closing price was $102.6687, the price moved about 2.51% in the opposite direction; roughly calculated with 10x leverage, the impact on the margin is about 25.1%. And this is a full exit, not just reducing the position, so at least this position no longer carries directional risk.
This is my speculation: this time it looks more like actively cutting risk rather than waiting for the short logic to play out. But don’t rush to conclusions yet; just from the closing, it’s unclear if a preset stop loss was triggered. I will continue to monitor whether this address opens shorts again to distinguish if this is a temporary retreat or abandoning this round of judgment.$COIN
Coinbase has been exposed for a data leak again. This time, I was waiting to catch a dip, but there wasn’t even a splash.
SlowMist confirmed that contact information of over 70,000 users was obtained by hackers, and the company itself admitted it. This amount of data would have been a big deal a few years ago. Yet COIN’s individual token price on OKX is currently 159.7, fluctuating between 158.1 and 162.9 in 24 hours, dropping less than half a percent. Just looking at the price, you’d think the leaked list was something trivial.
Later, it made sense. This time, what was obtained was contact info, not private keys or access to funds, which is a different scale from coin theft. But if phone numbers and emails fall into the hands of cybercriminals, targeted phishing follows, and these aftereffects aren’t something the stock price should reflect on the same day.
There’s also background: South Korea’s Bithumb was hit the same day, leaking info of 38,000 customers. Exchange hacks are as frequent as meals now; the market has already priced this in, and those who needed to be affected have been affected.
I originally thought there would at least be a small dip, placed an order and waited for a position, but after waiting a long time, nothing happened. If the market thinks it’s nothing, then it’s nothing.
#10月FOMC利率决议即将公布 Betting on a trend reversal with one day's capital flow, I think the risk-reward of this judgment is not worthwhile. SoSoValue data shows that on October 27 Eastern Time, the US $SOL spot ETF had a net outflow of $19.155 million, all from GSOL, with no net outflow from other products that day.
My judgment is slightly negative in the short term, but the claim of a "complete capital withdrawal" is overestimated. The outflow is concentrated in a single product, which has limited proof of overall demand weakening; the historical cumulative net inflow is still $1.513 billion, which cannot be erased by one day's data. However, cumulative inflow is a thing of the past and cannot guarantee subsequent support.
According to my speculation, if outflows continue and spread to more products, then the probability of demand weakening will significantly increase, making an adjustment in judgment more worthwhile; if it is just an isolated redemption, chasing emotions to draw conclusions is not worthwhile. I will first observe the persistence and coverage of the outflows and will not use a single negative number to pretend it is a winning probability. ETF net inflow exceeded 100 million on Monday, interrupting last week's net outflow. Can this prove that the net outflow on Thursday and Friday last week was just a short-term turnover? Can the market continue to verify this?
Monday's ETF data release showed a single-day net inflow of 110.3 million, with the net inflow relying solely on IBIT; other institutions did not show any return flow.
Crypto market data showed little change compared to Sunday, especially in core funds where no significant differences appeared, and total funds did not show obvious net outflow.
On the market side, $BTC tested around 80,000 continuously on the hourly level and then rebounded. Currently, the rebound is relatively strong, and short-term support remains effective. Next, watch whether the short-term 1-hour resistance at 80,600 and 81,400 can be effectively broken through and held. If broken and held, continue to watch 82,000 and 82,900.
Overall, the market is currently good. ETF funds returned on Monday, crypto funds did not net outflow, and the short-term trend looks more optimistic. Next, it depends on whether macro pressure can continue to ease. Once macro pressure is relieved, focus will shift to the situation of breaking through resistance!
#10月FOMC利率决议即将公布
#BTC现货ETF资金反复，市场买盘能否企稳？ $SOL
I'm temporarily staying away from SOL; it has little to do with price strength or weakness, it's that the chips haven't been cleaned out yet.
Right now it's hovering around 101.8, fluctuating between 99.2 and 102 in the last 24 hours, up just over 1%, the market looks okay. But some numbers don't add up.
Yesterday, SOL spot ETF saw a net outflow of $19.155 million. I specifically checked the details—this money all came from Grayscale's GSOL alone, the other six basically remained flat. The selling pressure on the ETF side isn't a bunch of people running, it's just Grayscale offloading. I usually don't treat this kind of outflow as a trend signal, but it does weigh on the market.
What concerns me more is another figure. The trading share of SOL perpetual contracts has dropped to 6%, while the Meme sector in the same period rebounded nearly 4% today. Even the Meme tokens in its own ecosystem aren't willing to contribute; on-chain, they're talking about removing the Meme label and competing with Wall Street. The idea itself isn't wrong, but the share dropping to this level indicates speculative funds are pulling out.
At the 101 level, I'm not chasing longs, nor am I fully bearish; I just want to wait until Grayscale finishes offloading this batch. Last week, I got itchy at a similar indecisive point and entered once, coming out with a small loss. This time I'll wait a couple more days; it won't kill me.
#10月FOMC利率决议即将公布 In the futures market, when the old contract rebounds and hits a dense trading zone, there are often groups of people waiting to break even and exit. If the buying hesitates even slightly, the price is easily suppressed. When I read this news, the first thing I think of is chip turnover, not the magic of round number levels.
According to Bloomberg, after Bitcoin's summer rebound faded, it has currently fallen back to around $80,000, facing sustained selling pressure in its attempt to reach $100,000. Buyers over the past two years have concentrated costs at $87,000 and above; this cost recovery selling pressure has suppressed rebounds twice this year, each followed by at least a 25% pullback.
My judgment is that this is somewhat bearish for the short term, but we cannot simply replicate the previous two declines. Unlike traditional futures with expiration and rollovers, $BTC spot has no unified expiration date, so the willingness to sell to break even may last longer; the dense cost zone also provides sellers with a psychological anchor, and rebounds require new buying to absorb the selling. I will watch whether the absorption can continue and will not use historical pullbacks as a ruler for the next move. What is the most important change needed for $FIL to truly take off? 🚀
Personally, I believe the core is to shift from "capacity expansion" to "real paid usage driven"!!
Currently, network capacity is mostly supported by subsidies, with a low proportion of real paid usage. Service providers rely on block rewards and continuously sell off, creating selling pressure; meanwhile, the token supply is large, value capture is weak, ecosystem demand is insufficient, and the experience lags behind mainstream cloud services.
Key changes: First, on the demand side, promote paid storage as the core revenue, making service fees far exceed block rewards;
Second, on the economic side, rely on unlocking completion and Solstice upgrade to reduce supply, establish a revenue-linked burn mechanism, forming a deflationary closed loop;
Third, on the ecosystem side, implement FVM for essential scenarios like data and AI, making FIL a necessary payment/settlement medium;
Fourth, on the experience side, improve hot and cold data and retrieval capabilities, lowering the access threshold.
In summary, only when people need FIL for actual use rather than pure speculation can its value truly sustain takeoff. $ million. The price increase is mainly driven by shorts being forced to cover. There are no clear signs of new leveraged longs; the funding rates for the three periods are slightly positive, which can only be considered background. The put/call open interest is basically balanced, but the put/call ratio of the day's trades surged to 2.79, indicating that some are concentrating on buying protection during the rise. The largest volume on the chart falls on the bullish candle, but much of this volI want to conduct an end-of-year experiment: specifically tracking those high-risk stocks that "seem beyond saving."
The screening criteria are:
📉 Stock price plunges sharply
📉 Falls below the price at the time of positive catalyst announcement
📈 But the business fundamentals are still improving
📊 Technical trends show noteworthy patterns
⚠️ Short interest continues to heat up
Candidates include $ALMU, $CIFR, $ASTS, $TE, and $SHAZ, with reference prices given in the original post as 7, 8, 39, 2.5, and 25 USD respectively.
The focus is not blindly bottom-fishing, but observing whether fundamentals can ultimately deliver when market sentiment is extremely pessimistic.
A high short ratio does not necessarily mean a rebound; data still needs to be verified. $BTC 4 billion in short positions were "buried alive," but the fuel is "one-time use"
Look at the liquidation data; this is the most direct driving force behind this rebound.
Bitcoin started near 79,000 and rose all the way to 81,240. During this process, over 4 billion dollars worth of bearish crypto positions were liquidated. Shorts were forced to buy to close, pushing prices up and triggering more short liquidations.
Those who chased shorts below 80,000 had a "reasonable" logic: Bitcoin broke below 80,000, ETFs are running, the Fed is going to raise rates, the trend is down, so the rebound is an opportunity to short.
When "breaking 80,000 means a bear market" becomes a consensus, it is the most dangerous trade.
But you need to see one thing clearly: the fuel for the short squeeze is "one-time use." After the shorts are cleared, the buying pressure from forced cover disappears. To hold above 81,000 next, real spot buying is needed. $BTC $ETH $SOL #10月FOMC利率决议即将公布 #SK海力士Q3营收首破100万亿韩元 #RobinhoodQ3营收增长，净利润下降 📊 $BTC current price $80,886, direction WAIT, I'll wait first.
I still hold a $BTC long position with an average price of $83,030, no adding to the position.
Price is stuck oscillating between $80,788–$81,009, the market has no direction.
A) If the 4H candle closes above $81,009 and holds on the retest, I will look to take profit at $82,892. If it falls back to $80,400, it becomes invalid.
B) If the 4H candle closes below the ascending trendline at $79,916 (which is still rising), the next level is $79,775. The $79,775 level has been tested 5 times on the retest, held 5 times, and broken 0 times. About $2.27 million in liquidations occurred near this level in the past 48 hours. If it climbs back to $80,400, it becomes invalid.
If it reaches $82,892, I will take profit on half and move the stop loss to breakeven.
Which side do you favor more? #OKXTraderVoices $ZEC I always say long positions will never be enslaved! Farmers rise up and sing, la la la
I've long said the privacy coin leader wouldn't fall so easily. A couple of weeks ago, funds flowed into other altcoins, causing mainstream, US stocks, and these leaders to plummet, but my reason for remaining firmly bullish is that you are all concubines, only they are the legitimate queen.
Currently, ZEC has reclaimed and stabilized above 1300. There may be a pullback next, but the overall bullish trend remains unchanged. Those seeking stability can take some profits first, then re-enter on the dip to continue bullish positions, holding long-term. Full-chain games were once highly anticipated, but many projects, aside from moving logic onto the chain and increasing Gas consumption, still struggle to break free from reliance on speculative buying in their economic models.
$ILV: The benchmark for full-chain AAA games. It is important to note that in 2026 it shifted from inflationary staking to a revenue distribution model, attempting to link token returns to actual game revenue. However, this mechanism is currently paused due to the security pool funds not being fully in place, and a sustained real revenue-driven buying demand has yet to form. The mechanism direction is correct, but execution is not yet complete.
$PIXEL: Once a blockbuster. It attracted a large user base through token incentives, but after gold farming profits shrank, daily active users dropped from a peak of 1 million to the 100,000–200,000 range. The production and consumption model is severely imbalanced; once speculative profits disappear, on-chain activity plummets sharply.
$RON: No longer a sidechain, but an Ethereum L2 (OP Stack), with annual inflation suppressed to about 1.2%. The treasury continuously captures sequencer net profits and marketplace fee shares, making cash flow sources more solid than a single game token. Although Axie is aging, Ronin’s infrastructure fee extraction capability remains.
Summary:
$ILV is "revenue distribution mechanism designed but execution paused, not yet realized"; $PIXEL is "activity exposed after incentive decline"; $RON is "L2 infrastructure fee extraction with relatively diversified cash flow." SK Hynix's financial report exploded, the super cycle of AI storage continues $SKHYNIX
Q3 revenue reached 104.6 trillion KRW, a year-on-year increase of 328%; operating profit was 83.3 trillion KRW, up 632% year-on-year, with an astonishing operating margin of 80%.
More noteworthy than the profit is that HBM4 is expected to become the main product in Q4, with over 50% of capacity for 2027–2028 already locked in by long-term agreements.
I have always been optimistic about the AI storage track. As AI computing power continues to expand, the demand for HBM, DRAM, and high-speed storage is also continuously growing.
However, storage is ultimately a cyclical industry, and an 80% profit margin cannot be maintained forever. The long-term logic remains strong, but whether the stock price can continue to rise depends on how much the market has already priced in expectations.
A good company does not necessarily equal a good buying point.
#SK海力士Q3营收首破100万亿韩元 $ETH
The FOMC's "hawkish pause" is the biggest variable. The probability of maintaining the interest rate in October is about 91%, but the expectation of a 25bp rate hike in December has risen to over 68%. The market has not priced in the end of tightening but expects the Fed to buy time and keep the option to tighten further in December. The University of Michigan's long-term inflation expectations have risen to 3.5%, the highest since May, and 69% of consumers expect interest rates to rise over the next year. The rise in real interest rates directly pushes up the discount rate for non-yielding assets, continuously pressuring ETH's valuation.
Liquidity conditions are also unfavorable. Ethereum spot ETFs saw a cumulative net outflow of $1.08 billion in October, marking the largest monthly outflow this year, with nearly all inflows from September being reversed. On October 26 alone, there was an outflow of $88.57 million, with BlackRock's ETHA accounting for $105 million. More worrisome is a whale holding $272 million in ETH long positions, whose liquidation price has been margin-called down to $2,181, about $177 below the current price. The presence of highly leveraged longs itself amplifies downside risk.
On the technical side, the 2,370-2,400 range is a zone of multiple resistances. With RSI overbought and ETF outflows, if a rebound to this level fails to break out with volume, it is likely to be a prelude to a secondary decline.
Key levels: On the downside, 2,296 (previous low) is the short-term defense line; if broken, the whale liquidation price of 2,181 comes into view. On the upside, 2,370-2,400 is a hard resistance that must be reclaimed with volume. #SK海力士Q3营收首破100万亿韩元
I am the mid-term intelligence guy, and the semiconductor memory sector is signaling a super cycle!
$SKHY Hynix's latest statement: Q3 DRAM average price rose over 20%, with demand expected to increase over 20% by 2027.
Memory supply shortage will continue until 2030!
Long-term agreements for 2027/2028 have locked in over 50% of capacity. To address the shortage, capital expenditure will significantly increase in 2027. NAND demand is also high, with Q4 DRAM shipment growth around 20%.
From a mid-term perspective, AI computing power drives a long bull market in memory, with strong certainty for leaders amid supply-demand mismatch. The shortage will persist through 2030, making the related industry chain worth deep exploration.
$BTC
$ETH I see this market like a class reunion: Bitcoin says it wants to sit at the $100,000 table, but old classmates stand up one after another: "First, return the money I contributed back then." 😂
According to Bloomberg, after Bitcoin's summer rebound, the upward momentum has faded, currently hovering around $80,000, with attempts to reach $100,000 facing continuous sell-offs. Buyers from the past two years have costs concentrated at $87,000 and above; the selling pressure to break even around this level has suppressed rebounds twice this year, each followed by a pullback of at least 25%.
I think the real challenge is the patience of holders, not the round number barrier. Cost concentration makes exit willingness cluster in the same range; the two failed rebounds may also reinforce the "sell once breaking even" mentality. If this mindset continues, I speculate that rebounds will need more sustained support—just excitement won’t be enough; but history doesn’t guarantee a third pullback.
What do you think will break the deadlock more: old holders willing to wait, or new demand willing to step in? Will this table break up, and who will refill the cup?I see resistance at this level, so I usually first ask: Are off-exchange funds willing to come in? According to Bloomberg, after $BTC's summer rebound, it fell back to around $80,000, and attempts to break $100,000 faced continuous selling pressure. Over the past two years, buying costs have concentrated at $87,000 and above; the pressure to break even around this area has suppressed rebounds twice this year, each time followed by a pullback of at least 25%.
My judgment is that this is more like a test of absorbing funds, and we shouldn't just focus on the round number levels. The cost-dense area provides potential selling pressure, but whether it can be absorbed depends on new demand. Here's my speculation: if US dollar liquidity improves and risk appetite rises, then break-even selling may not always dominate; if funds remain cautious, then rebounds are more likely to become exit windows.
I tend to look at the funding environment first before talking about breakthroughs. The past two pullbacks cannot be directly taken as the script for the third. To judge this round of absorption strength, what are people most concerned about now: interest rate expectations, US dollar strength, or institutional fund flows?[AI Infrastructure Loans Become the Only Growth Point, Banks Acknowledge "Deposit Flows to Crypto" for the First Time]
There are two details in this bank credit survey that are more worth remembering individually than the total volume data.
The first detail: AI infrastructure loans are becoming the only growth point in the credit landscape. The survey specifically inquired about AI-related loans: most banks stated they have not yet established quantitative approval standards for AI lending, but several banks reported that loan demand for digital infrastructure such as data centers is "gradually but steadily" increasing, and current AI-related lending is more inclined toward infrastructure providers rather than software developers or AI application companies—banks believe this tendency will strengthen in the future. In a broadly contracting credit environment, the only structural increment is given to AI infrastructure, which echoes the "AI capital expenditure counter-cyclical" narrative in the U.S. market across the Atlantic.
The second detail: this round of the survey included digital asset questions for the first time. The responses from Eurozone banks are worth reading word for word—over the past 12 months, the impact of digital assets on banks' business strategies was "slightly positive"; looking ahead to the next 12 months, banks generally believe the impact of digital assets on their business strategies will be "increasingly positive," while the impact on retail deposit business is "negative." This is the first directional confirmation within the official survey framework of the European banking system regarding "deposit flows to crypto assets": banks have realized that stablecoins and crypto assets are diverting their retail deposits and expect this trend to accelerate.
For those managing asset allocation, these two points—one pointing to credit flows over the next two years (AI infrastructure), the other to long-term deposit pattern shifts (crypto diversion)—hold more long-term value than quarterly tightening percentages.Let's start with a reality check: don't take "surging to $100,000" as the next stop forecast. According to Bloomberg, after Bitcoin's summer rebound faded, it has fallen back near $80,000, facing continuous selling pressure during the attempt to hit $100,000. I tend to see this news as a reminder of the chip pressure above, rather than a signal that a drop means a bargain to pick up.
I'm focusing on two issues. First, buyers over the past two years have costs concentrated at $87,000 and above; if the rebound brings these holders close to break-even, their need to exit could turn into selling pressure, limiting upside. Second, the report points out that selling pressure near this price level has twice suppressed rebounds this year, each followed by at least a 25% pullback. This doesn't guarantee a third drop, but it makes me discount the optimistic narrative that "one more push and it will break through." My judgment is that the market may be overestimating the appeal of the round number and underestimating the resistance before reaching it.
But bears shouldn't rush to celebrate either; historical pullbacks are not a script. If the price retakes $87,000 and holds after selling pressure eases, I will reduce my bearish bias and acknowledge stronger support than I expected. Are you currently bullish or bearish? Share your reasons: do you think the break-even pressure near $87,000 will continue to suppress rebounds, or will new demand absorb it? I don't touch high leverage; going slow is fine. Seeing this $XRP news, the first thing I noticed was the concentration of holdings: According to Santiment analysis, wallets holding at least 10 million XRP collectively control 46.87 billion XRP, accounting for 68.5% of the supply, the highest share since November 2022.
I think this signals the holding structure but is not yet proof of long-term value. An increase in wallet balances does not equal actual growth in usage demand; this data also doesn't reveal the entities behind the wallets, so it can't be directly interpreted as a collective bullish stance by independent large holders. If the concentration continues, then when a few holders adjust their positions, the market impact could be greater, which is my concern.
As for me, I have a steady holding temperament and won't change my pace just because of the word "whale." Even spot trading requires enduring volatility; leverage is even less to be reckless with. For those holding long-term, what usage data would you want to see to consider this rise in concentration a long-term positive?