Post

峰哥的交易日记
峰哥的交易日记
Show original
0.72美元的TIA,你还敢追吗? 30天翻倍、7天涨50%、24小时再拉20%——所有人都在喊“模块化之王回来了”。但扎心的是:这个市值6-7亿美元的链,一天真实收入只有几百美元。这波到底是叙事重估,还是杠杆吹起来的泡沫? 先看表面:从底部暴力拉升,成交量放大,资金真金白银进场。 你看到的0.72美元,跟主流行情一致(CMC约0.73)。24小时涨10-20%,7天涨50%,30天翻倍。距离历史高点20.85美元还跌着96%,但从今年低点0.28美元已经反弹了一大截。日线周线双双站上关键均线,趋势由空转多——所有指标都在喊一句话:突破确认了,别踏空。 但等一下。 价格是涨了,可链上真的有人用吗? 第一件事:Fibre测试3.07 Tb/s,很燃,但那是实验室数据 官方宣布Fibre在120个验证者端到端测试中达到3.07 Tb/s,理论接近20亿TPS级别。听着炸裂。 但你要搞清楚:这是基准测试,不是主网真实流量。 翻译成人话:就像一家餐厅说自己厨房理论上每小时能出1000份菜,但实际一天只卖了3份。 叙事可以画饼,收入不会骗人。 Celestia日费用仍在百美元量级,年化收入跟6-7亿美元市值严重不匹配。这波涨的不是基本面,是“高吞吐DA层”的故事+模块化赛道的资金轮动。 价格是叙事定的,不是收入定的。你买的是“未来的Celestia”,不是“现在的”。 第二件事:通胀降了、解锁完了,抛压确实轻了 这次有几个真利好,不能否认: Sustainable Blob Economy提案:通胀进一步下调,目前约2.5%,继续向1.5%下限走,长期通缩叙事强化。 Derive V3集成:选择Celestia做数据可用性层,这是真实业务使用信号,不是PPT。 解锁压力改善:大部分早期解锁已完成,核心贡献者vesting临近结束(10月底左右),卖压结构比两年前好太多。 Rekt Capital喊单:明确说TIA已突破“宏观积累区间”,关注后涨了约50%。 但扎心的是—— 这些利好加在一起,能让日收入从几百美元变成几万美元吗? 如果不能,那价格上涨靠的就是杠杆和情绪,不是需求。 第三件事:技术面超买了,而且是“拥挤的超买” 先说好的:突破长期积累区间,日线周线站上50日、200日均线,趋势反转确认。 再说坏的,而且更值得你警惕: 日线RSI进入70-74超买区,小时级别一度冲到80+,MACD高位钝化。 持仓量(OI)明显上升,资金费率有正有负,多空博弈激烈——部分交易所空头还在付钱给多头,说明多头拥挤。 清算热力图在0.72-0.73附近有密度,波动会被放大。 这不是健康回调后的二次启动,是突破后的高位消化。 这个位置追进去,一个插针就能把你扫下车。 多空对决,你自己看 一边是: Fibre测试强化高吞吐DA叙事 Derive V3真实集成,生态落地 通胀下调+解锁压力减轻,抛压改善 技术突破确认,Rekt Capital背书 山寨季指数回升,风险偏好回暖 一边是: 日收入百美元量级,估值严重透支 RSI超买70+,OI拥挤,波动放大 实际blob数据发布量没同步大增 10月27-28日FOMC,宏观扰动临近 涨的是叙事,不是现金流 关键位置0.72,离强支撑0.65只差7美分,离阻力0.75-0.76只差4美分。 上方阻力:0.75-0.76 → 0.80+整数关口 下方支撑:0.65-0.67(前突破位+均线密集)→ 0.60-0.63(更强支撑,破了就是突破失败) 操作策略 短线选手: 别追高。 0.72这个位置追进去,就是给前面0.4进场的人抬轿子。等回调到0.65-0.67稳住,轻仓试多,止损0.60下方。跌破0.60,视为突破失败,果断走。 中线玩家: 站稳0.70上方并消化超买后,目标看0.80-0.90。逻辑是突破确认+通胀下降+解锁压力减轻。但10月底FOMC前后要减仓,宏观一抖,高Beta山寨跌得比谁都快。 长线信仰者: Celestia的模块化DA叙事没问题,但别在超买区建长线仓。等回调到0.60-0.63,或者等真实blob费用数据跟上来,再考虑分批。你买的是基础设施,不是彩票。 TIA现在就像2023年底的SOL—— 所有人说“不就是个快点的链吗”,结果叙事+资金+生态共振,从20干到200。 但你别忘了,SOL那波是有真实TVL和交易量撑着的。TIA现在,收入还没跟上价格。 叙事可以让价格飞,但只有收入能让它不摔死。 这波涨的不是TIA,是你对“模块化未来”的信仰。信仰可以卖钱,但别在最高点才信。 $BTC $ETH $TIA
峰哥的交易日记
峰哥的交易日记
On October 17, the entire network saw $710 million liquidated in 24 hours, with long positions accounting for $508 million, and 217,395 people wiped out. The largest single liquidation was on Hyperliquid, a $20.42 million BTC long position instantly wiped to zero. The options market is even more straightforward: the probability of BTC reaching $100,000 before Christmas dropped from 12.5% to 9.7%. The founder of Derive.xyz said, "Long-term bullish bets are rapidly retreating, while short-term hedging demand surges." ETFs are also running. On October 15 alone, there was a net outflow of $262 million, totaling $151 million this week, after $681 million outflow the previous week. AI is also fracturing. CoreWeave's 2031 bond yield soared to 16%, its stock price dropped 15.5% in one day, halving from its yearly high. The Philadelphia Semiconductor Index fell for eight consecutive days, the longest streak since 2008. Oil prices are at $110, and the 10-year US Treasury yield is 5.097%. All of this is real. No avoidance. But one thing needs to be distinguished: what's falling is "price risk," not "structural risk." What is the main driver of this downturn? Leverage liquidation + tightening financing conditions + geopolitical oil price-driven inflation. It's not a problem with the Bitcoin network, not a systemic redemption wave in ETFs, nor a collapse in on-chain settlements. Glassnode's data points in the same direction: during the October 15 drop, sellers once again "surrendered," and every wave of loss-driven selling happened near local bottoms in August and September. The word "surrender" is heavy, but it describes positions, not assets. $700 million liquidated means leverage was wiped out, not Bitcoin. The 9.7% probability prices in macro frictions over the next two months, not the next two years. Now for the most contrasting part. On October 16, the market's most panicked day, Bitwise CIO Matt Hougan issued a memo titled "Choose Your Own Adventure." He broke down the future of AI and interest rates into three paths and explored each: Path one: AI brings super abundance. Productivity explodes, costs in intellectual-intensive industries collapse, value shifts to non-reproducible assets—land, masterpieces, gold, Bitcoin. Bitcoin wins. Path two: AI bubble bursts. Data center defaults, credit chains break, Bitcoin initially falls with risk assets. But AI construction is the largest infrastructure investment in US history, with a "near 100%" bailout probability. Rate cuts, balance sheet expansion, monetary supply surge, then Bitcoin rebounds sharply. Path three: 3% growth, 4% interest rates, muddling through. No drama, AI debt slowly repaid, soft landing. Bitcoin wins through ETF inflows, advisor adoption, corporate and sovereign allocations—"winning by exiting." Hougan's conclusion is one sentence: among all economic paths, almost every one ultimately leads to Bitcoin. On the same day, while CoreWeave plunged 15.5%, Cathie Wood's ARK bought 188,665 shares worth about $12.4 million. Amid credit panic, she was buying equity. So the real question isn't "where is the bottom." The real question is: which is closer to the reality of the next two years—the 9.7% pricing or the judgment that "all paths lead to Bitcoin?" 9.7% is a short-term two-month ticket. It honestly reflects inflation, rate hikes, war, AI credit cracks—all real in the next sixty days. But no one can price Bitcoin for two years. ETF outflows of $151 million are real, but Bitcoin's supply cap hasn't increased by a single coin. CoreWeave's 16% bond yield is real, but the direction of US debt accumulation hasn't changed. The drop to 9.7% probability is real, but panic itself is evidence that pessimism is fully priced in. The 9.7% Christmas price reflects macro frictions over the next two months. But no one can price Bitcoin for the next two years. During panic, extending the time horizon is often the only free alpha. $BTC $XAU $BZ #美国CPI与PPI双超预期,年内能否再加息?

Disclaimer: OKX Orbit content is provided for informational purposes only. Learn more

Replies

No comments yet. Be the first to reply!