Orbit Post Sitemap
Woke up this morning to a complete reversal in the liquidation structure. In the past 24 hours, the entire network saw liquidations totaling 135 million, with long positions accounting for 67.72%. However, in the last 4 hours, short positions liquidated 193 million, while longs only 19.36 million, indicating shorts are starting to be reversely harvested. BTC is currently at 79,857, with the 80,000 level repeatedly contested. There is a 73 million buy order at 79,300, but heavy sell pressure at 81,000. Below 79,000, long liquidations reach 855 million, and breaking 77,937 hits 1.563 billion; above 82,000, only 519 million short liquidations occur, but bullish momentum is insufficient.
ETH is at 2,314, with 2,300 as key support. Falling below the previous low of 2,285 will expose the 2,250-2,200 range. Resistance for a rebound lies between 2,340-2,360; failure to hold above this maintains the bearish trend. SOL is above 100, with the 200-day EMA at 98.27 as the structural bottom line; breaking this targets 86.67. Resistance above is at 105.99; a rebound without volume is not trustworthy.
The variables lie in the next two days: the FOMC on the 28th, PCE and GDP data on the 29th, and billion-dollar options expirations. After volatility compression, a sharp directional choice is imminent. Leverage is compressed within 5x, closely watching three closing prices: BTC 79,000, ETH 2,285, SOL 98.27. Intraday breaches don't count; only confirmed closes matter. Before macro fundamentals settle, capital preservation takes priority over direction. #本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 AI frenzy clashes with the Federal Reserve's iron curtain: the "ice and fire meat grinder" of global assets
AI computing power demand is exploding alongside risks of overheated capital expenditure. AWS computing capacity is sold out through 2027, with Q3 revenue growth expected at 41%; SK Hynix's HBM4 drives Q3 operating profit expectations near 77 trillion KRW. However, SpaceX is raising $40 billion in debt financing to purchase GPUs, while Musk warns that tightening credit markets will cause over 200 emerging cloud providers to collapse. The demand for computing power is indisputable, but expansion driven by high leverage is accumulating structural fragility.
Energy and crypto assets reflect a divergence in risk appetite. Middle East transportation has resumed but oil prices remain high, rooted in structurally increased transportation costs and geopolitical risk premiums. BTC has fallen below $80,000, and spot ETFs have shifted from a net inflow of over $1 billion last week to a net outflow of $772 million over two days, as investors doubt AI investment prospects combined with pre-rate decision risk aversion.
The market is caught in a tug-of-war between "AI industry prosperity rising" and "macro liquidity declining," with high energy costs further squeezing policy maneuvering space. Risk asset short-term volatility is likely to increase, and structural opportunities will be more concentrated on computing hardware with real profit support, rather than highly leveraged downstream applications. #SpaceX融资400亿美元，马斯克警告AI云断贷 The Mystery of CORE's Saudi Background: The Partner Emerges, and the Result Is Surprising
The market has been abuzz with the narrative that "Saudi sovereign wealth fund PIF holds a large position in CORE," but when the full partner was revealed, the truth was completely different from what everyone imagined. The ecological project Nawa Finance, which has obtained Shariah compliance certification, is responsible for issuing the certification by Amanie Advisors, headquartered in Malaysia with an office in Dubai. It is not a Saudi local institution, nor an official Saudi department. Nawa is a DeFi ecological project deployed on the Core chain, supported by Core Ventures, and jointly launched with Solv Protocol a BTC interest-bearing vault compliant with Islamic financial rules. At its launch, the TVL once surged to $40 million. The product's target market includes Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and other Gulf countries, but there has been no direct investment in CORE tokens by Saudi sovereign capital throughout the process. The fact: the ecological product obtained third-party Islamic compliance certification and is open to users in the Gulf region. The rumor: the Saudi sovereign fund directly invested in CORE, heavily backing the token price. This result is very surprising: Middle Eastern cooperation truly exists, but it is not the national-level capital entry that everyone imagined. The Middle East compliance channel is only a potential capital entry point and cannot solve CORE's fundamental core problems: official validator nodes continue to withdraw, SatPay is delayed, and the on-chain native revenue flywheel has yet to be realized.6:53, BTC fell below 80,000, but DOOD couldn't hold back anymore. The FOMC result hasn't been released yet, but funds have already started to rush for direction?
What’s more worth pondering now is not who is rising faster, but whether funds dare to continue increasing positions in high-volatility assets before the macro uncertainties are resolved. The real test will be if buyers are still willing to follow through after the decision is announced.
First, look at $BTC, price 79,972, the 80,000 level is temporarily lost. If it fails to reclaim above 80,000 soon, the market will find it hard to fully turn bullish.
Next, look at $ETH, price 2,312, weakening along with BTC. As BTC falls back, ETH also couldn’t hold independently, indicating funds are still cautious. Whether 2,350 can be recovered is a signal to watch market confidence.
Finally, look at $DOOD, price 0.002, intraday surged to 0.00266 with wide fluctuations. As the core token of Doodles’ transformation into a Web3 entertainment ecosystem, it surged from 0.0014 to 0.00266 within hours on October 26, with a single-day maximum increase close to 60%, and about 80% accumulated over 7 days. However, the community generally views this as a pure market move driven by speculative capital raids and short squeeze, so be cautious of emotional volatility before the FOMC.
Summary: BTC shows direction, ETH reflects sentiment, DOOD shows whether funds are willing to chase high-volatility opportunities. Macro expectations can ignite the market, but the real determinant of the trend is the buying power!
Do you think DOOD will continue to pulse stronger, or will it follow the broader market’s fluctuations after the FOMC?
Personal record only, not investment advice.
#闪迪存储业务高增长能否延续？ #Can Robinhood's trading business growth continue? Without Saudi investment, can CORE's 'compliance story' still be told?
Many people equate the Middle East narrative with the Saudi sovereign fund directly holding a large position in CORE tokens. Once this expectation is dashed, many immediately conclude that the entire compliance narrative is completely shattered. In fact, the two should not be conflated. The compliance story can still continue, but the narrative level has been downgraded: the ecological project Nawa Finance has obtained Shariah certification from Amanie Advisors, launching an interest-free BTC yield vault on the Core chain, open to Gulf Muslim funds. At launch, its TVL once reached $40 million, making it a grounded ecological product, not a completely false story. However, this certification is for the Nawa product itself, not for the entire Core public chain obtaining a Saudi regulatory license, nor is it Saudi official funds directly buying CORE tokens. The biggest shortcoming: this Middle East compliance product is merely an additional potential BTC capital entry point and cannot solve Core's most fundamental weaknesses. The risks of official validator nodes continuously withdrawing, SatPay delays, and on-chain native revenue failing to materialize remain unresolved. Without the "Saudi sovereign fund bailout" filter, CORE's Middle East compliance story can still be told, but it has lost its strongest emotional trigger. It is just a bonus theme for the sector, not a fundamental qualitative change. Whether it can realize value going forward depends on whether Nawa can continue to bring in new staked BTC.$BTC Bitcoin bulls should now focus not on the Federal Reserve, but on the Strait of Hormuz. Iran has softened its stance, agreeing to reopen the strait in seven days in exchange for lifting the blockade. The number of days is negotiable—five or four days would also work. The US military is ready and can launch a large-scale strike against Iran within 96 hours. They are just waiting for the midterm elections to issue the order. Right now, one line is negotiating, another is fighting. Oil prices are stuck fluctuating between 110-115, and BTC is stuck around 80,000. My view is: if the strait really reopens, oil prices could reverse, inflation would cool down, and the expectation for a rate hike in December would drop. I also expect gold to rise. But if real fighting breaks out, oil prices will surge to new highs, and no one will be able to escape. I guess both sides are waiting now, waiting for that moment, waiting to decide whether to fight or not. Bitcoin support is at 79,370/79,287, resistance at 81,000/81,700. Do you believe they will really negotiate?Brothers, don't be fooled by the morning session's drop list 😎 After BTC broke 80,000, it hovered around 79,581. The real clues are hidden in the one-hour positions and transactions.
Big picture: No major data on Monday, secondary indicators in the evening, low volume oscillation is very normal 🧘 Trying hard to find direction today can easily get misled by a single bearish candle.
ETH is the dark horse this session ⚠️ The biggest daily drop, daily position shrank by 4.26%, still shrinking 0.49% in one hour; others have already started to rise within an hour, but it’s still leaking, this is not just a normal follow-down.
Position game: In one hour, BTC and SOL have turned positive, ETH hasn’t kept up, short-term retreat is starting to diverge 👀 Not a full retreat, nor a full rebound.
Looking at ZEC alone: daily drop of 1.67% but turned green, volume increased by 7.29%, the only one with volume turnover; the three major mainstream coins all shrank volume by 20%, different nature 📊
Strategy:
① ETH hasn’t stopped leaking in one hour, don’t catch it yet;
② BTC hasn’t stood back above 80,000, don’t chase.
Bullets only go to directions that turn positive in one hour and hold steady; dark lines don’t move if they don’t turn, once they turn, follow 🚀$MON is bearish before the unlock on November 24, with the decline concentrated in the last seven days; there are still four weeks until this window. The amount unlocked this time is about 33% of the already unlocked circulating supply, far exceeding the backtest threshold. We backtested similar events and found that about three-quarters underperformed the market in the week before the unlock, with consistent direction in the two sample periods before and after. There is no stable direction after the unlock day, so the focus is on the week before. Currently, the market is very cold, with contract open interest only at $20 million and thin trading volume; no funds have rushed ahead yet. The volume increase during the rise and volume decrease during the pullback on the chart represent actions of existing funds, which cannot withstand this batch of new chips. The high points are moving lower, and the trendline is pressing down, closer to the upcoming supply. From mid-November, watch two things: whether open interest is increasing, and whether the low of 0.02098 holds. The condition for a bullish reversal is that in the last week $MON stands above 0.0223 and does not underperform the market, indicating that this batch of supply has already been digested in advance. CORE's Saudi Dream: Cooperation ≠ Investment
Many investors fantasize that the Saudi sovereign fund will directly take a heavy position in CORE tokens, becoming the project's strongest backer. But reality requires a clear boundary: compliance cooperation at the ecological product level ≠ direct investment by Saudi sovereign capital in CORE tokens. The ecological project Nawa Finance deployed on the Core chain has obtained Shariah compliance certification from Amanie Advisors, creating a Halal Bitcoin yield vault targeting the Gulf region, aiming to cover markets such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE. Core Ventures provides ecological support to Nawa; the product has already launched and briefly reached a TVL of 40M USD. This is a real ecological action, not a completely fabricated story. The community's over-interpretation narrative does not include direct investment in CORE tokens by the Saudi PIF sovereign fund. Nawa has obtained religious compliance certification at the product level, which does not equate to the entire Core public chain obtaining a Saudi regulatory license, nor does it mean that official Saudi funds have bought CORE tokens to support the token price. Cooperation can bring potential Middle Eastern BTC capital inflows, which is a plus for the sector, but it cannot solve Core's most fundamental pain points: official validator nodes continuously withdrawing, SatPay delays, and the on-chain native revenue flywheel failing to take off. The Middle East compliance channel only opens a door; it does not mean that major investors have entered. Cooperation is real, but the narrative of "Saudi heavy investment" is an exaggerated market story.Celo focuses on payments and native stablecoin issuance, while Ronin specializes in stablecoin circulation within blockchain gaming. AVAX, DOT, and APT lean towards institutional large-scale capital sectors; Celo and Ronin are rooted in high-frequency consumer scenarios, showing stronger growth potential in stablecoin circulation.Zhang Sufen would shake her head? Without even a Saudi background, CORE's bottom-line logic is even weaker
The core safety cornerstone of Zhang Sufen's contrarian strategy is that the target has a rigid bottom line. She prefers state-owned small-cap stocks; even if the stock price declines for a long time, the corporate entity will not easily disappear, providing a safety cushion for long-term lurking. Many retail investors fantasize that the Middle East narrative can serve as a "state-owned substitute bottom line" for CORE, believing that Saudi sovereign funds entering the market can support the coin price, but this expectation itself is market rumor. The fact is that there is no direct investment in CORE tokens by Saudi sovereign funds; only the ecosystem project Nawa Finance has obtained Islamic law compliance certification, which is a cooperation at the ecological DApp product level, not a sovereign capital heavy investment. When the fantasy of "Saudi takeover" is shattered, CORE's already weak bottom-line logic is further weakened.
It neither has the physical entity regulatory protection like A-share listed companies, nor does the project team stop actively withdrawing validation nodes. SatPay has been unable to launch for a long time, and on-chain real revenue has never been realized. State-owned bottom line guarantees "even if performance is poor, the entity still exists"; whereas CORE's biggest current risk is the project team continuously reducing input, and the chain's security steadily weakening. Of course, CORE still retains the high odds brought by the BTCFi track, and small position speculative bets on the trend are feasible, but absolutely cannot copy Zhang Sufen's approach of buying more as it falls and holding long-term to death. Zhang Sufen bets on market overkill, while CORE bets on the project not soft-exiting; the underlying risks of the two are completely different.I lost ten thousand dollars on oil here with $BZ. I understand clearly that Trump won't let oil prices drop so fast. High oil prices mean American companies sell a lot and make a lot of money. Trump is actually bullish on oil. Let's not talk about the one or two months before the midterm elections, and Iran won't lower its bargaining chips in negotiations. There are only a few days left before the midterms, so what's the point of negotiating now? Oil prices falling benefit voters for at least half a month, and the probability of Trump losing both houses is very high. Now the aircraft carriers have all been deployed to the Middle East. Is it because they're afraid of being photographed? Previously, the strait was blocked, and oil couldn't get out. It was Trump deliberately forcing Gulf countries to find their own way out. Now the effect has appeared: ship-to-ship transfers and other channels. Even with the strait blockade, oil transportation has reached pre-war levels. Iran's leverage over the strait is useless now. Let's wait for oil to hit new highs after the election.CORE's Middle East Chessboard: Is it 'Real Cooperation' or 'Riding the Narrative'? The data tells you
The Core Middle East sector belongs to genuine ecological cooperation, but the market has seriously exaggerated the narrative. The two need to be clearly distinguished in terms of actual implementation: The ecological project Nawa Finance has obtained Amanie Advisors' Islamic Shariah certification and, in partnership with Solv Protocol, operates the CoreSolvBTC.CORE compliant BTC interest-bearing vault. The product design avoids interest models and is open to Gulf Muslim funds such as those from Saudi Arabia and the UAE. It is an on-chain DeFi product that has already been launched, not a completely fabricated story. Core also held the Bitcoin Fusion industry conference in Dubai, promoting the ecosystem to Middle Eastern institutions, which is a genuine ecological action. The exaggerated and narrative-driven part in the market: There is no direct investment in CORE tokens by the Saudi sovereign wealth fund PIF; this is a rumor that emerged during community dissemination. Nawa is an ecological DApp deployed on Core and has obtained product-level compliance certification, which does not equate to the entire Core public chain obtaining a Saudi regulatory license. Sovereign funds have not directly entered to support the CORE token price. From the data perspective, although Nawa is launched, there has been no explosive growth of massive Middle Eastern BTC funds flooding in for staking. The Middle East cooperation has only opened a potential capital entry point but cannot solve Core's core shortcomings: official validator nodes continue to withdraw,"Don't dream that Saudi Arabia has bailed it out! The real trump card of CORE is only the 'compliance channel' in the Middle East"
The most widespread market fantasy is that the Saudi sovereign fund directly enters the market to heavily bail out CORE tokens. But the reality is: there is no direct investment in CORE by Saudi sovereign capital. The trump card Core holds is that the ecosystem project Nawa Finance has obtained Shariah compliance certification, opening a BTCFi product channel targeting Muslim funds in the Gulf region. Many confuse two concepts: Nawa product compliance ≠ Core's entire public chain obtaining a Saudi regulatory license, and it certainly does not mean Saudi official funds buying CORE tokens. Nawa is an ecosystem DApp deployed on the Core chain, supported by Core Ventures. The product itself has passed Islamic finance compliance audits by third-party institutions and can launch interest-free BTC yield products for Middle Eastern users. This is merely a capital entry point, not a major investor directly propping up the coin price. This Middle East compliance channel is a plus, but it does not solve Core's most fundamental problem: official validator nodes continuously withdrawing, SatPay delays, and on-chain real revenue failing to materialize. The Middle East compliance channel can only open an entry for part of the existing BTC funds but cannot prevent the project team from scaling back investment. The biggest trap in the Middle East narrative is portraying the "product compliance channel" as a "massive Saudi bailout." Whether the channel can continuously bring in real pledged BTC inflows is the real test of whether this trump card can be realized."Holding Above or Breaking Below, Both Sides Win"
Looking at a week, BNB shows relative resilience; over a month, BTC remains more stable; ETH is clearly the weakest. Ranking strength like this is more useful than just guessing the direction.
The 80,000 level for Bitcoin has been oscillating repeatedly. Both bullish and bearish views are voiced; having many opinions isn't the problem. The issue is many analysts always say: "Hold above here to be bullish, break below here to be bearish." If it rises, the bulls win; if it falls, the bears win. Either way, they win, but they never tell you how to position, where to set stop-loss, or if the risk-reward is worthwhile.
Such talk sounds professional but actually says nothing. Holding above or breaking below are confirmations after the fact. During trading, there is no such clear "here." By the time confirmation happens, the price has already moved. Retail investors following this often chase false breakouts and get cut on real pullbacks.
I prefer to look at relative strength: BNB's resilience shows support, BTC's stability means the main trend is intact, ETH's weakness indicates funds haven't fully spread. The repeated oscillation around 80,000 is digesting chips itself, so no need to rush to take sides. Strategically, scaling in, waiting for confirmation, and keeping cash on hand is better than just chanting slogans. Analysts can win on both sides, but you alone are responsible for your own account.Without Saudi investment, can CORE's 'compliance story' still hold?
Many people equate the Middle East narrative with the Saudi sovereign fund directly investing in CORE, which is a major misconception. The reality is that the ecosystem project Nawa Finance obtained Shariah compliance certification and launched a Halal Bitcoin yield product on the Core chain, targeting the Gulf markets such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE. This is a product-level compliance at the ecosystem DApp layer, not a direct investment of Saudi sovereign capital into CORE tokens. Stripping away the filter of "Saudi mega investment entering," CORE's compliance narrative can still be told, but its weight and imaginative space will shrink significantly.
✅ Remaining highlights: Nawa's Islamic-compliant BTCFi product theoretically can reach the massive existing BTC funds in the Middle East, representing a differentiated route in the BTCFi sector and still a positive theme. However, this compliance story has major shortcomings: 1. The compliance certification is at the Nawa product level, which does not mean the entire Core public chain has obtained a Saudi regulatory license; the chain itself has not received official blockchain operation permission from Saudi authorities; 2. The most critical point: the fundamental issues of the chain itself have not been resolved by the compliance narrative. Core risks such as continuous withdrawal of official nodes, SatPay delays, and insufficient real on-chain revenue still loom overhead. Middle East compliance is just a product-level embellishment, not a fundamental change that underpins the CORE token. If the chain itself continues to weaken, even if the ecosystem has compliant products, capital will be unwilling to stay long-term Did CORE really get investment from Saudi Arabia? Don't be fooled by the 'Middle East narrative'; the truth is actually quite sobering
The community rumor that "Saudi Arabia has made a huge investment in CORE, and Middle Eastern sovereign funds have entered the scene" is an exaggerated narrative. There is no official announcement of direct investment in CORE by Saudi PIF (Public Investment Fund). The real Middle East-related action in the Core ecosystem is the launch of the ecosystem project Nawa Finance, which focuses on Shariah-compliant BTC yield products covering the Gulf GCC region, supported at the ecosystem level by Core Ventures. This is not Saudi sovereign capital directly investing money into CORE tokens or the Core project itself. There is a fundamental difference between the two: sovereign fund direct investment means substantial real capital backing, bringing a long-term capital ballast; whereas Nawa Finance is just a cooperative DApp within the ecosystem, an ecosystem project, and is not equivalent to Saudi capital heavily holding CORE tokens. The market's portrayal of "launching compliant BTCFi applications in the Gulf region" as Saudi capital entering the market is an overblown narrative. Core's most critical shortcomings remain unresolved by the Middle East narrative: official validator nodes continue to withdraw, SatPay is delayed, partner Mobilum has weak qualifications, and on-chain real revenue has yet to materialize. The Middle East narrative can only be considered a positive theme, not a fundamental qualitative change. One cannot assume large capital is supporting the token price solely based on Middle East-related rumors; it is important to distinguish between "ecosystem regional cooperation" and "sovereign fund direct investment."Last week's $BTC spot ETF fund flows felt like a journey of sudden braking followed by flooring the gas pedal 😵
On Monday, it surged over $500 million, giving the impression that institutions were buying the dip; on Wednesday, another $500 million was added, warming sentiment and making the market think the buying momentum was stabilizing 🚀
But on Thursday, the story reversed with a single-day net outflow of over $630 million, and Friday saw a continued slight retreat 📉. Adding it all up, the week only saw about $300 million net inflow, with the rhythm completely disrupted.
On the charts, $BTC slid from the 84,000 range and has been tugging around 80,500. The 80,000 mark is a short-term critical point: holding it could allow a rebound, but breaking it might accelerate a test of 78,000 🧭. ETH fell from above 2,500 to around 2,350, moving in sync with BTC; 2,300-2,350 is a support zone, and breaking below would put it in a more passive position.
ETFs remain an important institutional entry point, but relying on them alone is insufficient to independently drive the market higher; macro data coordination is also needed. The upcoming Federal Reserve rate decision is the main event 👀#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ Today I checked the long-short data and found something very interesting — although BTC is falling, the retail long-short ratio is still at 69%, with bulls accounting for nearly 70%. The funding rate is still positive at 0.01%, meaning bulls are still paying to hold positions.
This is really dangerous. The lower the price falls, the more retail traders feel it's "cheap" and crazily add long positions. The higher the leverage stacks, once it truly breaks 79,000, a chain reaction of long liquidations will directly smash the price down to 78,000 or even lower.
Historically, every major bottom happened when retail traders were desperately cutting losses and the long-short ratio dropped below 40%. Now with 69% bulls still holding on stubbornly, it means panic is not enough yet, and the bottom hasn't arrived.
I believe the whales are waiting for this — waiting for the bulls' leverage to stack high enough, then a big bearish candle will wipe them all out. Don't be the one getting wiped out; keep your position light and wait until it truly crashes before entering.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ #中东原油运输恢复，油价为何仍居高位？ $BTC $ETH $ZEC #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？
On Friday, the memory sector showed clear divergence: Micron closed up 2.46%, SK Hynix's Korean stock rose 4.42%; SanDisk fell 1.82%, Western Digital dropped 2.97%. The trigger was SK Hynix's withdrawal of Solidigm's US IPO, which the market immediately interpreted as a reduction in NAND expansion funding, temporarily easing concerns about oversupply.
Micron benefited because it is a major NAND player, with expected reduced supply-side pressure and more stable prices. Western Digital was hit despite its previous earnings beating expectations; the market worries about the sustainability of price increases and rising capital expenditures. SanDisk lacks independent catalysts and can only follow the sector trend; if it can't keep up, it falls behind.
Keep an eye on the earnings calendar: SK Hynix will release Q3 results on Wednesday, October 28, with institutions already revising operating profit expectations above 76 trillion KRW; Micron's last report was at the end of September, with the next one pending, so no short-term catalyst; Western Digital just reported, with the next wave expected in January next year.
Directionally, memory is not a broad rally but selective. If SK Hynix's numbers explode, Micron is likely to follow.#交易之声：你的经验值得被听到
Before judging altcoins weakening, don't rush to check the macro calendar; first see if the chip distribution and sentiment have loosened.
Tokens like RAVE and LAB have taught us lessons: with the same big KOL speaking out, RAVE weakened continuously after being called out by ZachXBT, while LAB didn't react as much, indicating that looking at KOL alone is insufficient; you need to combine chip distribution, unlocking release volume, and order book support.
HYPE follows a different logic, relying more on capital inflow and macro sentiment. After Hayes publicly shorted and sold, the price dropped from over $70 to over $50; the resonance of KOL statements and capital flow is more effective.
So the order of altcoin weakening signals is: whether chips are dispersed and loosened, whether unlocking selling pressure is approaching, whether big KOL attitudes have shifted, and whether sentiment is ebbing. Traditional macro factors have limited impact on tokens but sudden attacks can't be ignored.
In short: watch chips, watch releases, watch KOLs, watch sentiment; don't treat a single signal as gospel, and be mindful of risks. #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ #中东原油运输恢复，油价为何仍居高位？ CORE: The position is right, the story fits, but the foundation is risky! The only play under Zhang Sufen's system
CORE's current coin price is low enough, and the BTCFi sector narrative has ample room for imagination. On the surface, it perfectly matches Zhang Sufen's aesthetic of low-price accumulation, but it lacks the "state-owned capital-backed safety net" that Zhang values most. The project team's nodes are continuously retreating, and the launch of SatPay is indefinitely delayed. The fundamentals face ongoing deterioration risks, so it absolutely cannot be treated as a long-term core holding. This is the core premise.
Within Zhang Sufen's risk control system, the only compliant play for CORE is: small position speculation, not heavy investment and passive holding. Referring to her strict position control approach for single assets, CORE can only serve as a high-odds small ticket in the portfolio, with single-ticket positions kept extremely low. Most of the principal must never be bet on it.
At the same time, hard observation indicators and stop-loss boundaries must be set: continuously track the number of independent validators, BTC staking scale, and SatPay progress. Once nodes continue to flee, proving fundamentals are further collapsing, one must decisively exit and not keep averaging down and holding hard as with state-backed low-price stocks.
The essence of Zhang Sufen's strategy is to wait for valuation repair under the premise that the main entity will not disappear. CORE can speculate on the valuation elasticity brought by the BTCFi trend, but it has no floor. The upside is huge returns, but the downside carries zeroing risk. Distinguishing between "themes suitable for small position speculation" and "core holdings suitable for long-term holding" is the key to this strategy."Why Zhang Sufen would never use CORE as a base position? Understanding these 3 risk zones can save you 100,000 in losses"
Many people see CORE's deep price drop and small market cap and want to use Zhang Sufen's contrarian strategy to heavily invest as a base position. In fact, this goes against her core risk control logic. Zhang Sufen's primary condition for setting a base position is that the asset has a bottom-line guarantee. She bets on market overreaction, not project failure. CORE has three major risk zones that completely break her stock selection criteria.
First, there is no rigid backstop entity. Zhang Sufen prefers small-cap state-owned stocks with real businesses and regulatory constraints. Even if performance is poor, the operating entity won't abandon the business lightly. Core DAO lacks such a backstop; the official nodes of the project team are continuously withdrawing, signaling the operator is actively reducing investment. Second, the fundamentals have the potential to continuously deteriorate. Unpopular A-shares only have temporarily poor performance and won't actively shut down core operations; CORE's independent validators are decreasing, SatPay is repeatedly delayed, and partner Mobilum has weak qualifications. The originally envisioned fee buyback flywheel is far from realization. The risk is not just short-term sentiment.
Third, a base position requires certainty, but CORE is a high-risk, high-reward bet. Base positions need stability, suitable for holding long-term while waiting for recovery; CORE has huge upside potential but no downside support. If there is an on-chain security issue, assets could face catastrophic drawdowns, making it unsuitable as a base position. Zhang Sufen's contrarian investment is not just about low price; the core is that the entity won't disappear. This is the fundamental reason she would never use CORE as a base position.Zhang Sufen only looks at 'state-owned capital backing'? Then she definitely wouldn't buy CORE, and here's why
Many people oversimplify Zhang Sufen's strategy, thinking it's just about bottom-fishing low-priced small-cap stocks. In fact, state-owned capital backing is a very critical safety boundary in her strategy. Targets with state-owned background have real companies and regulatory constraints; even if performance is poor, the entity is unlikely to be wiped out directly, providing a safety cushion for contrarian investors to wait for valuation recovery. Price drops are more due to market sentiment suppression, not the project itself actively abandoning operations.
Although CORE is low-priced and small-cap, seemingly a good target for contrarian bets, it completely breaks the fundamental safety bottom line of Zhang Sufen's stock selection. CORE lacks a rigid entity like state-owned capital backing it. The official verification nodes of the project continue to withdraw, indicating the project team is reducing investment and actively shrinking the ecosystem. Besides, SatPay keeps delaying, the partner Mobilum has weak qualifications, and the originally planned fee buyback flywheel has yet to materialize. The fundamentals are not just temporarily neglected by the market but face risks of continuous deterioration and gradual decay of the on-chain ecosystem.
Zhang Sufen's contrarian investment bets on market overreaction, not project death. CORE has a potential hundredfold upside from the BTCFi track but no bottom-line protection on the downside. Once nodes keep disappearing, the security of the entire chain will be impacted. Even though the coin price has dropped a lot, according to Zhang Sufen's risk control standards, she would not choose to enter and position in a target without rigid backing and with an operator continuously retreating.Applying the stock-picking logic of Zhang Sufen, the 'Contrarian King' of A-shares, directly to CORE results in a harsh outcome
Zhang Sufen's contrarian strategy focuses on uncovering unpopular, low-priced stocks at the bottom of the A-share market, favoring small-cap stocks with real business entities and state-owned backgrounds. Even if these stocks have long been depressed, the operating entities of the companies will not disappear out of thin air. There is a chance for valuation recovery driven by policy or industry catalysts, and the companies themselves have a bottom line to fall back on. This is the fundamental premise that makes this strategy viable.
On the surface, CORE appears to fit the "low-priced unpopular" contrarian stock-picking framework: low token price, small market cap, and the BTCFi sector yet to explode. Many investors blindly apply this logic by buying more as the price falls and holding long-term, but they overlook the fundamental differences between the two.
A-shares listed companies are regulated real business entities, whereas Core DAO has no physical backing. The current phenomenon of the project team’s official nodes actively withdrawing indicates that the project team itself is scaling back investment. This is not simply a case of market mispricing; there is a risk of continuous fundamental deterioration: the number of independent validators is steadily declining, SatPay keeps being delayed, the partner Mobilum has weak qualifications, and the expected revenue buyback flywheel has yet to materialize.
Zhang Sufen’s strategy can endure prolonged price declines, but it cannot accommodate risks like a "soft exit" of the project. If core indicators continue to weaken and one blindly applies the A-share contrarian lurking approach, the result will be very harsh. Contrarian investing does not mean buying just because the price is low; the premise of low price is that the fundamentals will not continue to collapse. Zhang Sufen's 'low-price niche' strategy turns out to be 'unsuitable' when applied to CORE?
The core of A-share bull investor Zhang Sufen's strategy: low-priced small caps + a main entity with strong credit backing (state-owned assets) + long-term bottom consolidation, gradually accumulating and holding for the long term, waiting for policy or industry dividends to bring valuation recovery. The state-owned assets act as a safety firewall, ensuring the company won't easily disappear, go bankrupt, or delist. This is the fundamental basis for the strategy's validity.
On the surface, CORE seems to perfectly fit the characteristics of "low price, small market cap, niche sector." Many people directly apply this contrarian bottom-fishing approach to enter, but they overlook the most critical underlying differences, which is the root cause of the unsuitability:
Zhang Sufen buys state-owned enterprise targets whose main entities will not voluntarily give up operations; however, Core DAO currently has official project-verified nodes actively withdrawing, indicating the project side is shrinking its business, lacking the rigid backing of state-owned assets.
Zhang Sufen's low-priced stocks only reflect a drop in share price, while the company continues normal operations; but CORE's biggest risk is not the cheap token price, but the continuous decrease of network validator nodes and the long-delayed SatPay launch, with fundamentals potentially deteriorating continuously, not simply a "niche good asset mistakenly punished by the market."
Of course, there are similarities: if the BTCFi sector later catches a favorable trend, node withdrawals stop, and ecosystem indicators stabilize, small-cap targets will also have huge valuation elasticity. But lacking a rigid main entity backing means Zhang Sufen's "buy more as it falls and hold long-term" approach would carry much higher risk when applied to CORE $QNT The competition for pure quantum computing targets is highly concentrated between IonQ (IONQ) and Quantinuum. Both follow the ion trap technology route, but their commercialization pace differs: IonQ currently leads in revenue scale and manufacturability, with quarterly revenues reaching tens of millions of dollars in 2026; Quantinuum, on the other hand, is at the forefront of the industry in two-qubit gate fidelity (99.92%, IonQ at 99.99%, both far exceeding peers).IRYS is acting a bit crazy this time. The current price is about 0.02843, down approximately 24.69% in 24h, with a 24h high of 0.04062 and low of 0.0258, and a trading volume around 12.47 million USDT. Looking at the broader market, BTC is around 79,981, down only -0.66% in 24h, ETH about 2,310.69, down -1.47%, basically moving sideways. In the same sector, DOOD has risen about 41%, CHIP about +15%. While one side is crashing, some are pumping — this kind of disconnect is quite typical in crypto.
Personally, I think these independent moves in small coins are the easiest to misread. The market hasn’t moved much, but this coin crashes first; many people's first reaction is "Is it oversold?" or "Will it rebound?" But what should be focused on more is liquidity and volatility themselves. A trading volume of 12.47 million USDT is neither very big nor very small; when emotions run high, prices can easily slip in thin order books, and the drop can be irrational.
So don’t treat "small coin independent moves" as trend signals; they are more likely just local funds stirring things up. The market moves sideways, and it does its own thing, which doesn’t mean the whole market will follow. If you’re panicking, don’t act yet; if you don’t understand, just watch and don’t rush to assign a direction. Volatility and liquidity risks are there, and chasing emotions is the easiest way to lose. Just my personal opinion, not investment advice.Bitcoin at $79,949, dropped below $80,000 over the weekend, down 3.33% in seven days, landing at the 10th percentile of the 30-day range. But what really changed this period was the direction of positions. In the October 19th issue, I wrote about Ethereum
All 8 of the largest liquidation pools were above the current price, forming a short squeeze chart. Today, 6 out of 8 are below. First, a definition: liquidation magnets refer to price levels where a large amount of leveraged positions will be forcibly liquidated; the intensity is a relative index of nominal scale at the same position, not the amount of liquidations that have already occurred. Below is a seven-layer analysis: Ethereum's ladder, the Saturday washout, the leaving leverage is not Bitcoin's, shorts are pressing, reserves turning into inflows, front-end rush, calendar. #交易之声：你的经验值得被听到 $BTC $ETH Don't underestimate CORE, don't mythologize CORE
The most rational way to view CORE is neither to blindly short and completely dismiss it, nor to mythologize it as the only answer in the BTCFi sector.
Don't underestimate it: The Satoshi Plus consensus enables BTC participation in staking mining, capturing the core narrative direction of BTCFi. Trillions in Bitcoin assets represent huge idle liquidity, and once the sector's momentum arrives, small-cap targets have extremely strong valuation elasticity, which is CORE's inherent odds advantage.
At the same time, don't mythologize CORE: grand visions do not equal deliverability. The project lacks primary VC locked tokens as a floor, official nodes are continuously withdrawing, and network security risks remain unresolved; the revenue-hopeful SatPay has been delayed multiple times, partner Mobilum has weak qualifications, and the expected fee buyback flywheel has yet to materialize.
It is neither a guaranteed winning floor asset nor a worthless vapor project. It is a high-odds, uncertain win-rate BTCFi sector speculative asset.
The key to investment decisions is not simply bullish or bearish, but to continuously track core indicators: the number of independent validators, changes in BTC staking volume, and SatPay implementation progress. When the momentum hits, the elasticity is huge; if fundamentals continue to deteriorate, the valuation will keep collapsing. #Robinhood交易业务增长能否延续？
Growth is real, but the driving forces are shifting, and vulnerabilities are also moving.
Bernstein expects Q3 revenue to increase by 13% quarter-over-quarter to about $1.5 billion, driven by expansion in nominal stock trading volume, options, and event contracts. However, the crypto segment is unstable: crypto revenue plummeted 47% in Q1, with retail speculative enthusiasm dropping 48% simultaneously. Instead, event contracts have taken the lead, generating $156 million in revenue in Q2 alone. Bernstein projects they will contribute $1.7 billion by 2028, surpassing the crypto business's $1.6 billion. Tokenized stock cumulative trading volume has also exceeded $15 billion, with 200,000 holders across more than 120 countries.
But structural concerns remain. Net interest income still accounts for more than one-third of total revenue and is highly sensitive to interest rates; trading revenue essentially depends on volatility, so when the market calms down, growth will stall.
Old Mo says: Robinhood is not "de-cyclicizing"; it is shifting the cycle from one asset class to another. Whether growth can continue depends on whether event contracts and tokenization can take over the volatility baton when crypto recedes, not on whether the user count is still rising. $BTC $ETH $ZEC The market pricing given in this October interest rate decision preview is: 92.8% probability of maintaining the interest rate unchanged, 74.8% probability of a rate hike in December. These two expectations are not contradictory: holding steady this time does not mean the tightening pressure at the end of the year disappears. The core judgment of the preview is that the market focus may shift from the interest rate result to the post-meeting statements. 📊 Three cryptocurrencies, different degrees of weakness ZEC: 1228.05U, -1.64%. The decline is in the middle among the three; based on this quote alone, it is not enough to determine whether it has an independent trend. HYPE: 77.706U, -1.00%. The smallest decline, but the preview describes its rise followed by a pullback and consolidation, indicating that relative resistance to decline and pressure on the upward move can coexist. CORE: 0.01718U, -2.10%. The largest decline among the three, also the target judged by the preview to have a weak trend, making it more worth observing whether the weakness continues. 💡 My view. The preview summarizes the market as range-bound and cautious, but range-bound does not mean low event risk. If the interest rate result meets expectations but the speech changes the year-end policy expectations, prices may still fluctuate rapidly back and forth. I pay more attention to whether the strength ranking among the three after the meeting can be maintained: if HYPE still cannot hold after a rally, the small decline cannot be directly taken as a signal of strengthening; if CORE continues to lag, it cannot be judged to rebound just because it fell more. ZEC can be used as a contrast among the three to observe whether the divergence is expanding or gradually converging. Would you place more importance on this interest rate result or the speech's impact on December expectations? #OctoberFOMCToBeAnnouncedThisWeekBrothers and sisters
ETH has hit a new low again, now at 2304, down 1.5%, much worse than BTC. The most heartbreaking thing is that the ETH spot ETF has seen net outflows for four consecutive weeks, with nearly $1.1 billion running off in October.
You might say ETH has no value, but the on-chain data looks good—staking accounts for 35% of circulating supply, and 170,000 tokens were withdrawn from exchanges in a single day. Yet the funds just won’t buy it; they’re all flowing to BTC instead.
The ETH/BTC ratio has slid from 0.0319 to 0.0289, which is the market voting with its feet. I think ETH will struggle to recover in the short term; 2300 is the bulls’ last cover, and if Wednesday’s FOMC leans hawkish, 2300 will likely break.
For those holding ETH, be mentally prepared. Don’t add to your position, don’t hold through the dip, wait until it really bottoms out before making a move.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ #中东原油运输恢复，油价为何仍居高位？ $BTC $ETH $ZEC Brothers, here's a contradictory set of data. Bitcoin dropped below 80,000, so logically the ETF should be redeemed, right? But last week BTC ETF actually reversed to a net inflow of 440 million USD, while the previous week was a net outflow of 220 million, a complete turnaround.
But look at Sunday alone, there was a net outflow of 169 million USD. What does this mean? Institutions are picking up in batches during the dip, but not buying every day—buying wave after wave on the dips, showing a lot of patience.
BlackRock IBIT is the only big buyer; Fidelity and Grayscale are still seeing outflows. Funds are concentrating into the top ETFs, and small ETFs are increasingly being ignored.
I think this indicates that long-term institutions have started building positions below 80,000, but they won’t push the price up in the short term—institutions buy for long-term holding, not to pump the price for you. Don’t chase just because institutions are buying; they can hold for a year, can you hold for a week?
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 #SK海力士Q3财报在即，HBM4能否提振盈利？ #Robinhood交易业务增长能否延续？ $BTC $ETH $ZEC BTC current price is about $79,936, down 0.49% in 24 hours. The 80,000 level was a defense line last week but has now become a ceiling. Risk appetite contracted before the FOMC meeting, ETFs turned to outflows in the second half of the week, and oil prices are supported by geopolitical risks. Before the price breaks below the 100-day moving average at about 75,600, bottom-fishers will still be stubborn, but the trading volume has already been honest. ETH current price is about $2,320, down 1.36% in 24 hours. The 2,300 to 2,400 range is the recent observation zone, and the price is currently hugging the lower boundary. Leveraged liquidations, ETF outflows, and upgrade delays are piling up. The rebound can’t even reach 2,350; accounts chasing longs are still holding on, but the buying pressure is not coming. XRP current price is around $1.29 to $1.30. The key is not the price but the chips: 1.26 is the most critical watershed right now. If it holds, it may consolidate between 1.30 and 1.43; if it doesn’t, the next support is at 1.11, with an extreme case at 0.98. Wallets holding tens of millions of XRP are decreasing, while exchange balances are increasing. Big holders are withdrawing, retail investors are taking over. Under this structure, waiting for “long sideways leads to a rise” might actually bring something else. Summary: BTC’s 80,000 level has broken and not recovered, ETH’s 2,300 is right underfoot, and XRP’s big holders have moved before the direction. Those being shaken out are the ones who mistake “no big drop” for “someone is supporting.” $ZEC
ZEC's position here is quite interesting. The current price is 1227, up less than 1% in 24 hours, fluctuating between 1177 and 1268 all day, with hardly anyone moving it. But the filing documents are not simple—Tuttle submitted two more 2x leveraged long ZEC ETFs on October 21. Counting back, the ZEC ETF launched at the end of August has already ranked third in capital inflows among all altcoin ETFs, only behind XRP and SOL.
A privacy coin without many new stories, yet ETF applications are queuing up to get in. This round, institutions are not after narratives, but chips.
I haven't gotten on board myself, but I've moved ZEC from the "just watch" list to the "keep an eye on" list. Privacy coins like this never give a heads-up when they start to rise.
#本周将公布10月FOMC利率决议 A rebound is not a reversal, and the flows prove it. Short-horizon money is tentatively returning to crypto, but the medium-term exit is still running. That divergence, not the green candles, is the story. On a four-hour view, $BTC drew $39.36 million in net spot inflows and $127 million in net futures inflows. Zoom out to 24 hours and the picture inverts: $34.95 million net spot outflows and $118 million net futures outflows. Over 30 days, futures outflows have widened to $7.82 billion. Money iIn this set of 48-hour liquidation pain point data, the long position pain point below BTC is only 0.62% away from the quoted price, corresponding to 100 million U in liquidation funds. All three coins have concentrated liquidation zones on both the upper and lower sides, but the distances and amounts are not completely symmetrical. BTC: Price at the time of statistics was 80020.5 U. The long position pain point below is at 79525.26 U, distance -0.62%, corresponding to 100 million U; the short position pain point above is at 81149.85 U, distance +1.41%, corresponding to 96.4642 million U. The amounts on both sides are close, but the lower side is clearly closer. ETH: Price at the time of statistics was 2308.41 U. The long position pain point below is at 2279.32 U, distance -1.26%, corresponding to 31.128 million U; the short position pain point above is at 2346.64 U, distance +1.66%, corresponding to 25.3217 million U. The lower side is not only closer but also corresponds to a larger amount. SOL: Price at the time of statistics was 100.49 U. The long position pain point below is at 99.49 U, distance -0.99%, corresponding to 5.4895 million U; the short position pain point above is at 102.97 U, distance +2.47%, corresponding to 3.7371 million U. Its upper and lower distance differences are also worth noting. 💡 My view. When judging this set of data, one should not only look at which side has a larger liquidation amount but also consider the price movement required to trigger it. According to the listed values, all three have the long position pain point below closer and corresponding to a larger amount; the so-called "both sides have chips" does not mean the risks on both sides are balanced. For BTC, the distance is worth prioritizing for observation, while SOL shows a more obvious upper and lower difference.Today I watched Buffett's speech. Buffett mainly focuses on long-term value investing. The distinction between speculation and investment is not so clear-cut. Long-term positions can be traded short-term, and short-term positions can be used as a prelude to long-term holdings. Everything must follow the profit effect or the so-called intrinsic value itself. Market fluctuations have never been a risk; regardless of rises or falls, the real risk has always been ourselves—whether we make trades within expectations or impulsive trades outside expectations. Our first step in the market should not be to pursue profit but to improve our cognition. Profit and loss share the same source; money earned by luck will eventually be lost by luck. Therefore, our first step should be to make the quality control of each trade increasingly strict, so that we can review where the problems in the portfolio lie and the cognition we possess. Wealth is the result. At the same time, we can use the fundamental theory that profit and loss share the same source to improve cognition and operations. For example, after I make a big profit, I tend to trade emotionally, meaning that after rationally completing a trade, I often lose money due to irrational trades. This means the profit effect inevitably comes with a loss effect. At this time, we can choose, or rather force, to go flat to avoid this loss effect. Thus, you endure two profit effects; the new profit effect will bring a new loss effect, meaning that going flat might cause you to miss the market. You need to solve the new loss effect. In this process, your trading cognition correspondingly improves, but profits usually depend on the risk you take. Infinitely reducing risk means infinitely reducing your profit Obviously, what Anthropic says is true.
Its profit margin is too low, the growth rate of revenue is too slow, and the revenue itself is too small.
Currently, the ROI of global AI large models is extremely unsatisfactory, so AI infrastructure stocks worldwide are plummeting, entering a bear market, which is a footnote to this.
This might be the last frenzy of AI. Although AI will exist, it is still far from profitability.
Earlier, we saw Facebook $META preparing to issue stocks to raise 60 billion, and companies like Nvidia have promised to buy part of their shares.
Just like their previous cycle of investments, it’s still the same game—how high can you fly stepping on your own feet?
However, Facebook (Meta)’s stock price has risen from 80 in 2022 to over 700 now, which is truly impressive.Switzerland Approves BBIT, US Finalizes Stablecoin Final Rule: Two More Bricks Added to the Slow Bull
Saying something not so "exciting," but I think very important.
In Europe: On October 20, Swiss FINMA approved the Bitcoin Fund ETF (BBIT), under Swiss legal framework, directly holding coins (not futures), retail-oriented, with assets segregated from the management company. It is expected to be listed on the SIX exchange in November, ticker BBIT. The official statement is "Switzerland's first and currently Europe's only spot BTC ETF"[web_doc 29][web_doc 35]. Previously, Europe only had ETPs, which are essentially debt instruments with issuer risk; this time it is a fund.
In the US: On October 21, OCC released the final implementation rules for the GENIUS Act, effective January 18, 2027, together with the Act itself. Key points: a 5% always-available liquidity floor, no single counterparty exceeding 40% of reserves, redemption must be completed within two business days; however, no safe harbor was provided for "interest-paying" existing stablecoin projects, such as Coinbase's 3.75% and PayPal's 4% rewards, which will require case-by-case review[web_doc 32][web_doc 38]. Both money channels are shrinking: ETF flows and stablecoins
I'm watching two faucets for liquidity: ETFs and stablecoins. Both have been dripping this week.
First, ETFs, according to Farside's data (10/19–10/23, five trading days): a net inflow of $301.2 million for the week, ending two consecutive weeks of net outflows[web_doc 39]. But breaking it down, from Monday to Wednesday, $1.075 billion flowed in, then on Thursday $636 million + Friday $138 million were withdrawn totaling $774 million, a 72% pullback[web_doc 39]. The $636 million outflow on the 22nd was the largest single-day redemption since June, with IBIT+FBTC accounting for nearly three-quarters[web_doc 6].
Next, stablecoins, which are more covert: DefiLlama snapshot on October 25 shows total USD stablecoin supply at $302.598 billion, down $2.055 billion from October 18 and down $3.204 billion from September 25[web_doc 39].
What does this mean? Stablecoins are the "ammunition stockpile" on the market; shrinking indicates funds are exiting rather than just waiting. Not to mention ETH ETF had another $221 million outflow that week, marking the fourth consecutive week of net outflows[web_doc 39].
There are exceptions: the Fear & Greed Index is at 50 (neutral), whereas a week ago it was 59, indicating "greed".Someone is betting 68 million on 90,000, but the options market is still buying insurance
The drama at this options table is more exciting than the spot market.
On Derive, on October 20, a wallet bought 800 BTC call options expiring on November 6 with a strike price of 90,000 in one go, with a notional principal of about 68 million USD — the timing is right after the US midterm elections [web_doc 37]. The implied probability of "breaking 100,000 before Christmas" calculated on the same platform rose from 9.7% a week ago to 12%; meanwhile, the probability of "falling below 70,000 before Christmas" dropped from 15.6% to 11% [web_doc 37].
Sounds impressive? Flip over to Deribit and the picture changes: the front-end 25-delta skew is still negative, puts are more expensive than calls [web_doc 37]. Coinglass liquidated 254 million USD in the past 24 hours, with 99,714 liquidations, longs accounting for 63.8% (162 million vs 92 million) [web_doc 11].
Translation: retail investors are betting on 90,000 after the election, while institutions are still buying downside insurance.
Who do I believe? I don’t side with either. Negative skew means "smart money" isn’t following the trend; this 68 million looks more like a one-sided bet, not a consensus. Before options expire, prices will be pulled toward the "max pain" point, so don’t mistake others’ bets for your own direction. $BTC "80,000 is the institutional iron bottom"? I'll give you three cracks
The most dangerous word in a bull market is "iron bottom."
The popular saying now is: ETF holders' average cost is about 81,500, the listed companies' treasury average is about 82,000, so institutions won't cut losses below the cost line, and 80,000 is supported by someone[web_doc 31]. Sounds solid, let me knock three times for you:
Crack one: The cost line is a break-even position, not a buying position. A group of people near the break-even price want to run when it rises a bit, fear when it falls below, and stop-loss orders cluster. It amplifies volatility, it does not absorb volatility.
Crack two: The biggest buyer stopped buying. Strategy holds 848,517 coins, but last week only bought 267, while simultaneously repurchasing $190 million of its own 12% coupon-like preferred stock STRC[web_doc 31]. The focus shifted from "buying coins" to "managing debt," and that is the signal. Its average holding price is about 75,400; if the coin price really drops to that range, mNAV will be pressed below 1x, issuing new shares to buy coins would dilute old shareholders—during the 64,000 wave in August, it already sold over 1,600 interest-paying coins[web_doc 31].
Crack three: Low volatility may mean the market is thinning. Deribit's DVOL once dropped to around 37, a five-year low[web_doc 31]. Many interpret this as "matured," I interpret it as "after the order book was washed out, no one is taking over." Historically, after low volatility periods, several#Google Cloud business grows 82%, how is the AI investment return? Oil at 110, BTC can't act tough
An undervalued transmission chain, let me break it down for you:
Oil price → Inflation → Federal Reserve -> US dollar interest rates → Bitcoin valuation.
At the close on October 26, WTI November contract was $101.41/barrel, up 3.51% for the day; Brent December was $109.86, up 3.72%[web_doc 30]. Trump said "oil prices will drop soon," but the market didn't buy it[web_doc 30].
At the same time, US inflation in September was still around 3.7%, the University of Michigan's one-year inflation expectation rose from 4.6% to 4.7%, and the long-term expectation rose from 3.4% to 3.5%, all the highest since May; the final consumer confidence index was only 48[web_doc 15].
This set of data effectively ties the Fed's hands. Once inflation expectations become unanchored, Powell/Washington would rather tighten more than risk credibility by easing.
So now when I hear "digital gold hedges inflation," I want to laugh. In the short term, BTC follows real interest rates, not the CPI number. If you really want to hedge an oil shortage with crypto, you need to measure with a ruler longer than three years. $BTC Federal Reserve: No change this time is nonsense, December is the real deal
At 2 AM Beijing time on October 29, the FOMC will announce its decision.
Conclusion first: CME prices the probability of holding rates at 3.75%–4.00% in October at 90.6%, with only a 9.4% chance of a 25bp hike[web_doc 9][web_doc 15]. The September hike was the first since 2023, unanimously approved by all 12 votes, raising the range to 3.75%–4.00%[web_doc 26].
The real action is in December: CME estimates a 67.5% chance of a rate hike, 25.8% chance of no change, and 6.7% chance of a 50bp hike[web_doc 9]; Reuters' October 20 survey is even more decisive—100 economists, all 100 believe there will be a hike in December[web_doc 26]. Last month, it was less than half.
Why do I care so much? Bitcoin doesn’t yield interest. USD deposits give you just over 4%, what does BTC give you? Volatility. The higher the interest rates go, the more expensive the opportunity cost becomes.
Don’t just watch that one line on rates early Wednesday morning, watch what Powell says: no economic forecast this time, the statement will likely be very short; the market wants to hear his wording on whether "the September hike was a one-off or the start of a series"[web_doc 15]. If he’s hawkish, 80k won’t hold; if ambiguous, we can breathe a little. $BTC 80,000 mark, silently hit over the weekend
First, let's get the price right: at 03:45 Beijing time this morning, BTC was $80,039, down 0.47% in 24 hours, with a daily range of 79,390–80,825; down 2.49% over 7 days, total market cap 1.61 trillion, accounting for 60.03%[web_doc 24]. Looking at the daily close: on October 25, it closed at 80,024, down 0.95% for the day, with a low of 79,767[web_doc 1].
What really unsettles me is not the drop, but that the ETF was still bleeding over the weekend. According to Lookonchain's on-chain data, on October 26 (Sunday) Eastern Time, the spot BTC ETF had a net redemption of 2,123 BTC in one day, about $169 million; among them, IBIT alone redeemed 1,358 BTC, accounting for 64%[web_doc 34].
But ETFs only trade during US stock market hours, so the redemption orders on Sunday were placed before the market closed on Friday. In plain terms: institutions in the US don't want to hold even a second longer over the weekend.
My own response is simple: 80,000 is a psychological level, not a technical one. Don't "bottom fish" here, nor "confirm a breakdown to short" here. Wait for the US stock market to open on Monday to see if the 2,123 BTC redemption is an isolated case. $BTC The most vulnerable link has never been BTC itself, but the positions propped up by "bull market faith." Have you noticed that the loudest voices during the drop disappear first? Last night, I came across something quite interesting: a blogger who previously insisted that the bull market hadn't arrived and that it was just a consolidation phase. As a result, a bunch of bullish followers unfollowed him, and some even notified him in the comments that they had unfollowed. When BTC dropped back near 80,000, he asked, "Are you all okay?" and then pointed out a detail: STRC was still above 99; although it dipped to 98.99 pre-market, it recovered. Last month, when BTC approached 80,000, STRC was only around 95 to 97. This comparison is the key. In the same price range, STRC's position has risen, which means what? It means some funds are not chasing price sentiment but are expressing their exposure to crypto assets through a more stable vehicle. On the surface, it looks like BTC is tugging back and forth near 80,000 and the chat groups are lively, but the real support is hidden in details like "no new lows in price, but related assets lifting their bottoms first." Capital preference is shifting from chasing high volatility to leaning more toward "holdable" assets. This change is more worth watching than the candlestick patterns themselves. The bullish path is also clear: if the 70,000 area truly acts as support converted from the previous top, then this retracement looks more like a shakeout than a trend reversal. Leading indicators like STRC holding firm will give spot market sentiment some confidence, and the catch-up rally of ETH and several major altcoins may follow. But risks also