Orbit Post Sitemap
$81,000 was tested three times, but no one is holding the line
$BTC has dropped near $81,000 three times since October.
$ETH has also been testing around $2,350 back and forth.
What does this price level mean: three probes downward, with on-chain losses decreasing each time.
This indicates that those who couldn't hold on have mostly left; it’s not a full-scale sell-off.
Who is placing orders here: buy orders below $80,000 are thinning out.
One step further down, if broken, the price is likely to slide directly to $78,000.
The defenders consume chips every time they catch the fall.
After three probes, the number of buyers has decreased by 30%.
The real direction is often decided at the moment when the order book is thinnest.
#机构资金持续流出，BTC能否企稳？
#$BTC $ETH Observation: pump.fun's fees are too harsh, high rates discourage existing capital
These fees are indeed outrageous, anyone who sees them would curse
Perpetual contract orders charge up to 0.10% developer fees, plus an additional 0.25% for cross-chain.
Breaking down the calculation behind this, centralized exchanges (CEX) typically charge ordinary users about 0.04% to 0.06% per trade, but pump.fun stacks such high fees directly on-chain
Add the base fees of the cross-chain bridge itself, and entering and exiting the market gets skinned twice.
Essentially, this is leveraging its huge Meme traffic to treat users like "cash cows" driving them to Hyperliquid, while it sits in the middle collecting tolls.
However, in the current macro environment of extremely low volume and stagnant market, capital is extremely sensitive to friction costs
Large funds and high-frequency traders will never be the sucker here; liquidity will inevitably be drawn to cheaper, more efficient platforms.
If these fees don't come down, except for a very few pure gamblers blinded by FOMO, real trading capital simply won't stay
This kind of greed, in a liquidity-drained market, is purely cutting off one's own path.Why is it said that "now is a good time to buy technology stocks on dips"?
Fundstrat's technical model shows that after continuous pullbacks, the technology sector is close to the DeMark indicator's sell exhaustion zone and has touched a key trendline support.
Although recent volatility has significantly increased, the extent of the technology sector's pullback is very limited compared to the sharp gains in September, and the overall medium-term upward structure remains intact.
Recent hot September CPI data and concerns over high debt levels in some AI companies triggered short-term sell-offs, but with the options expiration date passed and U.S. Treasury yields retreating from highs, a short-term trading bottom has been identified.
Recently, computing infrastructure companies represented by CoreWeave and Oracle have raised market concerns about their debt levels; meanwhile, storage and chip stocks such as Seagate, Western Digital, Intel, and SK Hynix have shown weakness. In the same interview, Interactive Brokers' Chief Strategist Steve Sosnick pointed out that investors previously believed AI returns were unlimited and thus ignored high financing costs of 9% or more; but now the market is seriously examining whether "AI's actual monetization can outperform borrowing costs."
This year's bull market is not a solo run by technology stocks but defined by intense sector rotation — previously, the energy sector surged nearly 40%, followed by technology stocks taking over, and recently the healthcare sector quietly hit all-time highs. Betting solely on technology stocks risks missing rotation dividends and enduring very high drawdown volatility.
So, will there still be a bull market this year?
$ETH $SNDK
From the two major declines before and after SanDisk, the first wave of decline was a sharp drop followed by a sharp rebound, while the second wave was a gradual decline with a slight rebound.
My understanding is:
The first wave of decline occurred after the main upward wave surged, and during the decline, the fomo bottom-fishing sentiment was still present.
The second wave of decline happened after a big rebound, and the fomo sentiment during the decline had long been exhausted by the first wave of decline,
so the second phase of decline was smoother than the first wave.
This seems similar to the trend of many coins (especially altcoins that have surged dramatically), where the later waves of decline are generally smoother than the first wave, which can be leveraged.
I wonder if my understanding is correct? Mouths shout long, hands press short. Retail investors are buying, while the main forces are accumulating.
$BTC 81694, up 0.04%, spot +66.47 million, contracts +54.45 million, money flowing in both directions. $ETH 2409.93, down 0.98%, spot outflow 83.47 million, contracts outflow 435 million, bleeding on both sides. $SOL 103.09, down 1.72% at the bottom, positions shrank fastest by 3.39%, contracts -89.9 million.
Price is just the shadow of money. Wherever the money goes, the price will eventually follow. $ETH and $SOL are being held extremely bearish by two parties, and $BTC also has one party pushing short positions to the most extreme level since $62,000. Meanwhile, retail investors in the three major mainstream coins are all shouting long.
This is not a long-short divergence. This is two groups at the same table betting in opposite directions; one side will inevitably be carried away.
The "hardness" of $BTC hides the most painful divergence.
Retail long-short ratio is 0.5187, the curve is rising, retail investors are bottom-fishing with a bullish bias. Large holders' long-short ratio is 0.83, the curve is pressing down, large holders are cautious with a bearish bias. More subtly, another set of data: the number of whale wallets holding 10 to 10,000 BTC surged to 20,338 this week, a historical high; these people have been accumulating during every crash in the past three months. But Binance funding rate is negative, -0.0073%, and derivatives traders' bearish sentiment has returned to the level when BTC was still at $62,000. $ZEC perpetual 50x short position, opened at 1,199.94, now at 1,132.97, floating profit +279.05%.
Just betting on a top reversal: 1,199.94 tested three times without breaking, volume decreasing stepwise, classic double top pattern. Enter the market the moment the bearish candle crashes down, never guessing the top prematurely. 50x leverage, stop loss at 1,240. This move has been very clean, almost no rebound, big profit secured.
For now, hold steady and let the bullets fly a bit. Keep 1,150 as the defense line to protect the principal, wait for a clear signal around 1,080 before deciding to add or reduce, no rush. $BTC $ETH #特斯拉发布新一代Roadster，行情走高 $BTC 81,500 at this level, it's no longer "analysis," it's grinding.
On October 9th, 12th, and 15th, the price hit the same area three times and was bought up each time. The realized on-chain losses corresponding to each dip have been decreasing — October 12th is less than the 9th, and although the 15th is slightly higher than the 12th, it is still below the peak on the 9th. In plain language: fewer people want to sell and run; it's not panic selling, but swinging chips are being gradually swept away piece by piece.
Richard Byers' original words have been repeatedly quoted, but the truly striking part is the latter half — he said that while the "sell pressure exhaustion indicator has reached the highest level ever," he added: market sentiment is not like an extreme bear market, but multiple on-chain indicators simultaneously point to a bottom forming. This is not a single-signal "oversold rebound" narrative; it's a structural clearing.
The macro side is not giving any favors. Both September CPI and PPI exceeded expectations, and inflation stickiness has pushed back rate cut expectations further. Wash's dovish remarks reduced the probability of a rate hike in October from 27% to below 15%, providing a breathing room, but "no hike in October" does not mean "rate hikes are over," and pricing for December is still rising. $BTC's current dilemma is this: on-chain data says "selling is done," but macro says "not over yet." The two clocks are out of sync, so the price can only grind sideways around 81,000, exchanging time for space.$BTC is currently most afraid not of a drop, but of a "false stability".
The liquidation chart shows: 840 million long positions below, 810 million short positions above, neither side is thick anymore. This means the extreme leverage from the past two days has been washed out, but no new money has come in—the market is treating sideways movement as a substitute for direction.
81k-82k is the pivot: 82,418 is the bears' pain point, the point that hurts them the most if touched; 80,753 is the bulls' pain point, if it breaks down, the longs will be liquidated first. The longer it moves sideways, the more one side will be worn down by time.
I tend to use next week's CPI + interest rate hike expectations + ETF weekly net outflows (BTC 228 million / ETH 320 million and so on) to choose the direction:
→ First surge to 82,418 but fail to hold = false breakout, then kill longs on the way back
→ First break 80,753 but with low volume = sweep liquidity, then pull back to the pivot
A real trend requires a breakout from the range with volume to count. Don't guess the bottom early, don't catch a falling knife, wait for the order book to thicken again. $ETH $ZEC Bitcoin has really "gone viral" this round 😎 Its market cap has surged to 12th place among global assets, pushing Saudi Aramco to 13th. Keep in mind, in 2020 Saudi Aramco was still the global market cap leader. To break into the top ten, Bitcoin needs another big explosion.
But it gets harder the higher it climbs: silver, ranked 6th, is about twice Bitcoin's size, and gold at the top is roughly 18 times larger. This means Bitcoin has surpassed almost all major corporations but still hasn't reached the threshold of the two precious metal giants.
This week's market action is even more interesting 📉 Tech stocks collectively pulled back 6%–10%, silver dropped 6.5%, while Bitcoin only dipped 1.4%. Six of the top ten global assets fell harder than it did. Its resilience is showing; capital seems to no longer treat it solely as a "risky tech asset" but is placing it among "alternative assets." Some are even shorting tech stocks and going long on Bitcoin.
So the question arises: Is silver the next challenge for Bitcoin? How long will it take to double again? $BTC $ETH #特斯拉发布新一代Roadster，行情走高 #美国CPI与PPI双超预期，年内能否再加息？ #SpaceX上市后首份完整季度财报将揭晓 Brothers and sisters 😮💨
Third day of short positions, the market feels like it's being held down. No take-profit, watching until dry-eyed. Liquidation is a single cut, grinding the market is a dull knife pulling back and forth.
$BTC is hovering around 81,000. 83,500–84,000 has changed from a “floor” to a “ceiling”; first see if it can stand above 82,200–82,600, if not, it’s just a rebound. The strong support below is at 80,300–80,500, liquidity is thin over the weekend, so spikes can easily hit here; 80,200 is more like a psychological level.
$ETH around 2,420. The real defense line is at 2355–2360, if broken then look at 2,204; above, first close at 2,496, then stabilize at 2,552 to be considered a strength shift. Right now it’s defense, not offense.
$ZEC is between 1,126–1,160, watershed at 1,041. Daily close above keeps the structure intact, below look at 1,000 and 750–800. Retraced 31% from 1,698 in three weeks, don’t treat it as a minor correction.
Why is the market dead? Money is not in the mainstream. CPI 3.7%, PPI 6.3% exceeded expectations, the probability of a rate hike in October rose by another 30%; BTC/ETH spot ETFs saw a net outflow of over $1.2 billion in a single week. Tesla Roadster released, on-chain
#特斯拉发布新一代Roadster，行情走高 #美国CPI与PPI双超预期，年内能否再加息？ #SpaceX上市后首份完整季度财报将揭晓 $BTC 81,500 at this level, it’s no longer "analysis," it’s grinding.
On October 9th, 12th, and 15th, the price hit the same area three times and was bought up each time. The realized on-chain losses for each dip have been decreasing—October 12th’s losses were less than the 9th’s, and although the 15th’s were slightly higher than the 12th’s, they still remained below the 9th’s peak. In plain terms: fewer people want to run, it’s not panic selling, but swinging chips are being gradually swept away piece by piece.
Richard Byers’ original words have been repeatedly quoted, but the real sting is in the latter half—he said that while the "selling pressure exhaustion indicator has reached the highest level ever," he also added: market sentiment isn’t like an extreme bear market, but multiple on-chain indicators simultaneously point to a bottom forming. This isn’t a single-signal "oversold rebound" narrative; it’s a structural clearing.
The macro side isn’t giving any favors. September’s CPI and PPI both exceeded expectations, and inflation stickiness has pushed back rate cut expectations further. Wash’s dovish remarks lowered the probability of a rate hike in October from 27% to below 15%, providing a breathing room, but "no hike in October" doesn’t mean "rate hikes are over," as December pricing is still moving higher. $BTC’s current awkwardness lies here: on-chain data says "selling is done," but macro says "not yet." Two clocks are out of sync, so the price can only grind sideways around 81,000, trading time for space.
The ETF front is also worth watching. On October 16th, Bitcoin spot ETFs saw a total net inflow of $5.05 million, with IBIT alone at $16.78 million for the day. The numbers aren’t large, but the direction has reversed from outflows to inflows. Institutions aren’t making a big push; they’re tentatively stepping back in. This scale of inflow can’t support a rally, but it tells you one thing: the most panicked paper hands may have already handed over their chips.
$ETH at 2,404, DeFi TVL still hanging at 119 billion. These two numbers together express an attitude: the price has been hammered by FUD to this level, but the ecosystem’s base holdings remain intact.
There’s a detail that needs narrative correction. The Abraxas Capital purchase of 242,652 $ETH worth $561 million happened in May 2025, not a new move this week. Calling it an "ongoing institutional buy" is easily refuted. But that history is more interesting today: Abraxas acted around $ETH 2,400 back then, and now $ETH has returned to the same price range. The difference is that Abraxas is currently deleveraging—moving 20,000 $ETH from Aave to Spark, repaying 55 million USDS, and the related address’s $ETH long exposure has shrunk to about $350 million.
What does this mean? Smart money at this level isn’t blindly adding positions; it’s deleveraging, preserving positions, and waiting for signals. This is much more honest and sharper than the narrative of "institutions are buying again." $ETH’s value recovery logic is intact, RWA and PayFi are still running on Ethereum, but short-term pricing power isn’t in the narrative’s hands, it’s in the leverage structure’s hands.
$ZEC surged 40% in 24 hours to 743, with the privacy sector rallying collectively: XMR +7.45%, DASH +40.36%. This is the only corner of the current market not moving in sync with BTC.
Three factors are solid: the November 18th halving hard-coded, inflation cut from 4% to 2%; Grayscale’s $102 million fund entry; Arthur Hayes placing ZEC second only to $BTC in his family office and calling for a $10,000 target. The halving countdown combined with institutional endorsement means the supply-side story won’t easily fade before mid-November.
But the other side must also be presented. Hayes later publicly reported exiting $ZEC positions, although he said he would buy back if it dropped to 300-350. His style is to oscillate between narrative and position; following his words to trade is more likely to liquidate than profit. $ZEC’s volatility—from 400 to 1697 and back down to a few hundred—has already demonstrated what "high-leverage cleansing of halving narratives" means. The 40% daily gain is a fact, but it’s also the risk itself.
Back to the initial question: Is $BTC forming a bottom?
The on-chain answer is: it is forming, but not finished. The three dips with decreasing losses are a true signal; short-term holders’ loss proportion is still about 31%, below the historical average of 42.7%, meaning chip clearing may not be sufficient yet. 81,000 has held, and passive selling is waning; but if another macro negative hits and pushes losses back up, this bottom will need another round of grinding.
$ETH is waiting for leverage to be fully cleared. $ZEC is betting on narrative inertia before halving; volatility is its current attribute.
The macro rope is still held by the Fed; don’t mistake on-chain "bottom signals" for "takeoff signals." The bottom is a region, not a point, and this region is being walked through in the most painful way.
#特斯拉发布新一代Roadster，行情走高 #美国CPI与PPI双超预期，年内能否再加息？ #SpaceX上市后首份完整季度财报将揭晓 $SOXX has fallen for nine consecutive sessions, setting the longest losing streak since 2006.
Conclusion: After an extreme drop, a technical rebound is highly likely, but a rebound does not equal a trend reversal. For now, treat it as an oversold recovery; it is not advisable to change the mid-term structure judgment based on a few bullish candles.
Five historical references:
- June to November 2022: Fell 18.25% in June, rebounded 18.48% in July, dropped again in August and September, and only strengthened again in November. A typical "crash—big rebound—retest of lows" pattern.
- October to December 2023: After two months of consecutive declines, the drop in U.S. Treasury yields drove an 16.09% rise in November and a 12.96% rise in December.
- August 2024: Fell first then rebounded, but plunged again in early September. A rebound does not mean the correction is over.
- September 2024: Fell 11.77% in a single week, then rebounded 9.28% the following week. Recovery is quick when selling pressure eases.
- March to June 2025: Consecutive declines in March and April, with over 10% recovery only appearing in May and June. Corrections may last several weeks or even months.
The current decline structure is close to September 2024, but macro pressures are heavier: high U.S. Treasury yields, not low oil prices, AI infrastructure financing risk re-evaluation, and valuation reversion is not complete. The market looks more like a withdrawal of existing AI bulls rather than a concentrated clearing of bears.
In terms of operations, heavy holders can reduce risk by taking advantage of the rebound; those with ample cash need not rush to heavily buy in the first rebound. No need to be overly pessimistic in the short term; still control positions in the mid term. $WLD Negative News: Whale Buying Against the Trend Gets Trapped, WLD Lacks Substantive Empowerment
WLD is currently priced at 0.5093, with the daily chart showing a decline from the previous high of 0.7234, now in a weak range of wide fluctuations.
On-chain data shows that a certain whale spent $4.32 million at an average price of $0.57 over the past 14 days to buy 7.6 million WLD tokens, currently facing an unrealized loss exceeding $780,000.
Against the macro backdrop warning of a possible sharp drop in risk assets, building positions against the trend on the left side faces severe capital pressure.
From a fundamental perspective, although WLD's iris verification and AI identity narrative have been hyped for years, substantive technological implementation and a closed commercial loop remain lacking.
The token lacks strong rigid demand within the ecosystem and faces ongoing unlocking sell pressure and global regulatory scrutiny risks.
Without real value generation capability, relying solely on conceptual packaging and whale bottom-fishing is unlikely to support the valuation model.
Currently, with the market extremely low in volume, assets that emphasize marketing over actual implementation are highly likely to continue seeking a bottom or weak consolidation in the short term. 10.18｜Key levels repeatedly tested, direction always decided during thin liquidity periods
BTC and ETH are currently both standing on the pressure test platform. Since October, BTC has retraced near $81,000 three times, while ETH has repeatedly tested $2,350, with the market essentially in a tug-of-war.
The macro environment is the direct driver: after the US September CPI exceeded expectations, the market's pricing for a Fed rate hike in October jumped from 22% to 53.7%. US Treasury yields are approaching a 24-year high, putting overall pressure on risk assets. The three BTC dips correspond to decreasing on-chain loss scales, resembling a gradual clearing of swing chips rather than widespread panic. However, Glassnode points out that new buy-side liquidity below $80,000 is weakening; if effectively broken, it could accelerate a slide toward the "real market average price" of $78,000.
ETH's $2,350 is a short-term watershed: holding it means range-bound oscillation; a volume-driven break below exposes the $2,323 low directly. The commonality in both markets is that repeated probing of key levels itself consumes defensive strength, and directional choices are often made at moments of thinnest liquidity.
$BTC $ETH
#美国CPI与PPI双超预期，年内能否再加息？ #美国CPI与PPI双超预期，年内能否再加息？ ETFs are bleeding, and whales are scooping up. The 81,000 meat grinder is driving retail investors crazy.
$BTC current price is around 81,350. The 15-minute Bollinger Bands are compressed to the extreme, with the upper band at 81,805 and the lower band at 81,348. The amplitude of 30 candlesticks is only 2.6%, and the direction is about to be decided. The upper MA5 and MA20 form a death cross resistance between 81,450 and 81,580. RSI is 38.8, weak but not oversold. The funding rate is +0.0053%, positive. Long positions account for 64.3% of accounts, but active long trades are only 56.2%. Retail investors are holding on, while smart money is borrowing to reduce positions on the rebound.
But there is a divergence that must be faced. BTC ETFs saw a weekly outflow of $228.5 million, ETH ETFs outflowed $320 million, and nearly $3 billion in leveraged positions were liquidated, with longs accounting for $2.3 billion. However, the on-chain "sell pressure exhaustion indicator" has reached its highest level ever, and whales are quietly accumulating while ETFs bleed.
The strategy is simple: focus only on confirmed responses at the boundaries of 80,000 and 84,000, and do not bet in advance. Do not chase orders inside the range. If ETH falls below 2,400, reduce positions. Do not use crowded long chips to bet on a bottom that is not yet confirmed. $BTC's consecutive afternoon rallies after 4 PM over the weekend are more indicative of technical play within the weekend liquidity vacuum rather than a signal of trend initiation. Yesterday's "pump then dump" scenario has already been fully demonstrated once.
📉 Yesterday's (10/17) scenario: a classic "bull trap harvest"
There is a clear corresponding pattern on the chart: the price was first pushed up near $82,900, followed by a 4-hour bearish candle that slammed down to around $80,700.
The underlying logic mainly relies on the special weekend environment:
Institutions are closed on weekends, liquidity is thin, and a small amount of capital can amplify volatility and create false breakouts; $82,900 has been repeatedly tested as strong resistance, so rallies easily trigger selling pressure; breaking below $80,700 aims to trigger leveraged long stop losses, completing liquidity extraction before pulling back, essentially a stress test of the $80,000 support.
In simple terms, the afternoon rallies over these two days occurred during the worst liquidity, clearest resistance, and most cautious macro sentiment time window. Yesterday proved that rallies lack sustainability before resistance levels and tend to evolve into a "prelude" to evening declines.
To judge whether this will repeat today, watch for two signals:
· Whether the price can hold above $81,800: failure to hold means it remains within yesterday's logical framework.
· Whether there is another rapid drop in the evening accompanied by increased volume: if so, it indicates the "bull trap followed by liquidity harvesting" pattern is still ongoing.Chip stocks have fallen for eight consecutive days; one day is about sentiment, eight days indicate a turning point.
I've lined up the evidence from this week for you to see the direction yourself.
First, Samsung and SK Hynix prematurely ended their $40 billion buyback programs; the companies are no longer buying their own shares.
Second, CoreWeave's bonds dropped to 80 cents on the dollar, with a default rate of 63%, and the three founders cashed out 3.3 billion before the crash.
Third, Goldman Sachs says two of the three warning lights for AI capital expenditure are already lit.
Fourth, right now, the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index has fallen for eight consecutive days.
Four events, one direction: money is flowing out of AI.
But I want to be fair. Demand hasn't collapsed.
Changxin earned 480 million daily in the first three quarters, turning a profit, and storage prices are still rising. Barclays is right; this is a position clearing, not a demand collapse. The stock price drop reflects expectations, not business fundamentals.
So how should we interpret this eight-day losing streak?
My interpretation is a gear shift, not a crash. AI is shifting from storytelling to profit verification; money is moving from hype to revenue validation. The gear-shifting period is the toughest; whoever proves profits first survives, and for those who can't, the eight-day drop is just the beginning.
The crypto world is interesting this week: chip stocks fell eight days straight, while Bitcoin hovered steady at 81660 without moving. The correlation has loosened, which is a good sign, indicating that the crypto market is starting to establish its own floor.
Until the clearing is over, don't catch flying knives or listen to stories.
What do you think? Is this eight-day drop a clearing or a market top?
#纳指100周跌5.5%，芯片股八连跌 $BTC $ETH $SNDK $COAI Bearish News: COAI Unlock Countdown, Massive Selling Pressure Looms
COAI is currently at 0.2578, slightly up 2.58%
The 1-hour chart has steadily declined from 0.3119 to 0.2188 and is now weakly consolidating around 0.25
24-hour trading volume is only 680,000, indicating extremely dry liquidity.
On the news front, 8.32 million tokens will unlock on October 25, valued at approximately $2.15 million
This is more than three times its daily trading volume, representing a heavy potential selling pressure for this already liquidity-starved small-cap AI coin.
The current slight rise looks more like a technical rebound after overselling
Against the backdrop of a severely shrinking macro market and lack of fresh capital, the huge unlock expectation will likely prompt existing holders to hedge early.
As the unlock date approaches, the market will probably face pressure; caution is needed against dump risks before and after the unlock, and beware of volume-less gradual declines.#台积电Q3净利润超预期，盈利创历史新高
Oil prices have risen again, which might be more worth watching than a big bearish candle
Many people watching the crypto space only focus on whether BTC went up or down today, but sometimes, the real factors affecting the market aren’t even within the crypto space.
In the October 18 public market data, Brent crude oil has already reached around $110. With energy prices continuously rising, the biggest concern isn’t how much more expensive gas has become, but whether inflation will rise again.
Why care about this?
Because if inflation can’t be brought down, the Fed won’t easily cut interest rates. Once rate expectations shift, the dollar, U.S. Treasury yields, and risk assets like BTC could all be impacted.
Of course, rising oil prices don’t necessarily mean Bitcoin will fall; the market might have already priced in the news. What really matters is how funds react after subsequent economic data is released.
There are several key dates to watch next week:
October 20: U.S. new housing starts data release.
October 22: U.S. initial jobless claims data release.
October 23: University of Michigan consumer sentiment final value and inflation expectations data release.
Especially inflation expectations—if they continue to rise, market concerns about interest rates may heat up again.
So, these days I prefer to first observe how the market moves rather than betting on a single direction in advance. After the news comes out, whether BTC can hold steady and whether the dollar strengthens are more important than simply guessing price moves.
The more uncertain the market, the more important it is to control leverage. #Meta巨额AI投入进入回报检验期 The real core contradiction — can the massive AI spending hold up (the biggest focus this time), Q2 capital expenditure is 31.1 billion, an extremely exaggerated investment, all smashed into AI computing power. Even if revenue exceeds expectations, as long as management announces continued increases in capital expenditure, free cash flow will be continuously eroded, and the market will directly interpret it as below expectations.
Whether the money earned from advertising can cover the AI burn is the essence of this testing period.🚨 $BILL -97%: Who does the future belong to, and where is the money going?
AI, InfoFi, billion-dollar vision... the story sounds very promising. But $BILL is making the market question as the price has dropped 97% from its ATH.
According to the warning from on-chain investigator Specter, 17 wallets related to the team have transferred 988 million BILL to exchanges in two months, along with another 360 million BILL reported transferred this week.
There is not enough evidence to conclude fraud. But this flow of funds deserves transparent explanation. Next week is the time for AI to report results again
On Wednesday after the US Eastern session, Meta, Tesla, IBM, and Texas Instruments will release earnings together, followed by Western Digital on Thursday.
This round, the market no longer asks if you are still spending money, but only one question: When will the money invested turn into revenue?
I feel that after this week, AI stocks probably won’t be rising hand in hand anymore?
The US stock market pullback is really no less intense than the altcoins! 😢$BTC The trend of Bitcoin this week looks increasingly off to me 🤔
US CPI and PPI have consecutively exceeded expectations, and the macro environment looks unfavorable for risk assets, yet after a whole week of turmoil, BTC only dropped about 2.5%
What concerns me most is the market's reaction to the negative news: every time news comes out, the price drops sharply, but when it tries to follow through with a sustained decline, someone always pulls the price back up
The problem is, the bulls haven't been able to organize an effective counterattack either...
This is quite frustrating; the bears can't push out a trend, and the bulls can't regain control; the best approach in this kind of market is to hold back, watch more, and trade less 🫡
#美国CPI与PPI双超预期，年内能否再加息？ STRK was down 13% yesterday and another 12% today, dropping to 0.063.
The reason is clear: On October 15, 127 million STRK tokens were unlocked and released. The price had risen 180% in the past 30 days, but once the unlocked tokens hit the market, profit-taking followed, and both sides combined to push the price down. Today's volume was 19 million, with 2 million long positions liquidated, and protocol funds are still flowing out.
In short: unlocking plus profit-taking equals a double whammy. Not chasing yesterday was the right call, and today you definitely shouldn't catch the falling knife. 0.062 is the immediate hurdle; if it breaks, the next target is 0.055—the starting point of this October rally.
For tokens dumped due to unlocking, do you wait for a full drop before looking again, or just cut your losses now?
$STRK $TIA $ETH
#Layer2 Anthropic's proposed $60 billion chip financing raises a question that concerns me more than the financing record itself: when the equipment becomes worthless in the future, who ultimately bears the loss?
Here is a disclosed case for comparison: In Broadcom's 10-Q submitted in September, an AI equipment leasing deal previously arranged included a guarantee. When conditions such as customer default are triggered, the disposal value of the equipment affects the guarantee liability, with a maximum potential liability of about $29 billion after all equipment is deployed. As of disclosure, no guarantee payments have been made.
Note, this old arrangement cannot be directly taken as the final terms of the new $60 billion plan. But it shows that after suppliers participate in financing support, their role may go beyond "selling chips and receiving payment." The customer's repayment ability and the future value of the equipment may also fall back on the supplier.
Financial institutions willing to participate must also consider what specific risks they bear. To see if demand is solid, one must ask what support the supplier provides and how risks are allocated, not just count how many participants are in the financing.
Financing support itself is a normal commercial arrangement, and guarantees do not mean losses have already occurred.
But for rapidly updating technology equipment, after being included in multi-year financing arrangements, who is responsible for bearing the cost of obsolescence? The IPO is certainly important, but the excitement of going public cannot replace the risk allocation in contracts.
#Anthropic拟融资600亿美元，IPO迎考验 黄金涨0.40%，BTC涨0.21%，两者同一天同向走强；同时ETF单日转为净流入、美元指数跌破102。这个组合意味着什么？ 先说新闻。四个数字：黄金4,186.7（+0.40%，现货4,166.10）、BTC 81,528.4（+0.21%、近一周 -1.84%）、美元指数101.78（-0.22%）、标普500 7,659.44（-1.09%）。资金侧，美国现货ETF最新单日净流入1,620万、5日净流出3.237亿、10日净流出8.481亿；情绪侧，恐惧贪婪指数从63回落到55。 再看资金影响。黄金与BTC同涨的组合，在过去一年里通常对应三种宏观情境：一是美元走弱（今天的直接原因）；二是实际利率下行预期；三是流动性宽松预期。三种情境对BTC的持续性影响不同——美元走弱是短期、实际利率是中期、流动性是长期。要判断这轮同涨能走多远，关键看资金：如果ETF持续净流入，说明是配置资金在推动；如果只是价格反弹而资金不动，那更可能是美元走弱带来的一次性弹性。 对BTC的含义：同涨本身是积极信号，但"同步"不等于"同等"。黄金有央行购金与实物需求作为长期买盘，BTC的长期买盘仍主要来自ETF与What truly threatens Bitcoin from quantum computing might not be just cryptography
Bitcoin may face a tricky problem in the future: if quantum computing technology develops enough to break the related elliptic curve cryptography, what should be done with those BTC whose public keys have already been exposed but cannot be migrated to quantum-resistant addresses?
A number often mentioned in community discussions is about 2.7 million BTC.
These assets involve early addresses, wallets suspected of lost private keys, and other legacy addresses. Some holders may have long been unreachable, or there may be no one able to complete the migration at all.
Even if a quantum-resistant upgrade is launched in the future, it does not mean these BTC will automatically be protected.
The real difficulty is how the community should handle these assets that cannot be actively upgraded?
If in the future they are stolen by attackers and sold off in bulk, the market might face additional selling pressure.
But if to avoid this situation, the choice is to restrict or even freeze assets of specific addresses, it would touch on Bitcoin’s most core governance issue: who has the right to decide which BTC can continue to circulate?
Insisting on non-intervention might bear the risk of theft; actively freezing could change people’s understanding of Bitcoin’s rules and asset autonomy.
Of course, quantum computing has not yet been proven to practically break Bitcoin’s existing related cryptographic systems; this remains a future risk that needs to be studied in advance, not a crisis that has already occurred.
The question is: when technical security conflicts with ledger rules, which one does the community prioritize?When the US stock market crashed yesterday, crypto on average dropped 3.42%. But platform coins were supported by buyback orders, so their prices stabilized, with an average stop in decline of 1.3%. For those holding spot positions, no need to panic:
$OKB was the most resilient, only dropping 1%, considered a stabilization after Thursday's deep drop. However, its weekly chart still hasn't stopped falling, so don't go all in lightly.
$BNB basically follows Bitcoin's movement, only down 1.2%. But its performance this year has been weak, having dropped 37% over the entire year.
Because it has penetrated the entire crypto ecosystem, it actually acts somewhat like a thermometer for the overall market.
$HYPE is the most dangerous. It touched 82.44 intraday but then dropped back to 78.95; it's unclear who's buying the dip. It has failed to break 83 several times in a row, clearly indicating someone is offloading.
Comparatively, among the three platform coins, OKB holds a bit more value to keep.BTC's market cap has risen to the 12th largest global asset, pushing Saudi Aramco to 13th. In 2020, Aramco was still at the top of the market cap rankings, but now BTC has overtaken it, sparking market discussions: could the next target be silver?🤔
To break into the top ten, BTC still needs a strong rally. Looking laterally, silver's market cap is about twice that of BTC, and gold's is about 18 times larger, so the gap remains. However, BTC's momentum in surpassing large corporations has led investors to reassess its position📈
This week, the tech sector pulled back 6%-10%, silver dropped 6.5%, while BTC only fell 1.4%. Among the top ten global assets, six experienced larger declines than BTC. This resilience indicates that investors no longer see it merely as a tech stock proxy; some traders are even shorting tech stocks and going long on BTC🔥
Upcoming focus: Tesla Roadster market performance, whether the US can raise interest rates again this year after CPI and PPI both exceeded expectations, and SpaceX's first full quarterly report after going public. $BTC $ETH $ZEC #特斯拉发布新一代Roadster，行情走高 #美国CPI与PPI双超预期，年内能否再加息？ #特斯拉交付超预期后盈利修复成焦点 Delivery volume is already old news; the real focus this quarter is not how many cars were sold, but whether "profits can hold up" + "whether Robotaxi/Optimus have made substantial progress"$SOL This morning I was talking about its stablecoin transfer numbers, and now the market has brought up another point: volume contraction, only 50% of the usual. This is interesting—the story is growing (557 million transfers in September, 30% more than August), but the trading volume is dropping. Translated into plain language: more people are using it, fewer people are speculating. The liquidation heat around 105 above is thick; the main force wants to work in the easiest direction, which is to spike it upward, but a spike is just a spike. Think about it yourself, a coin that is busier and busier on-chain but weaker and weaker in the market—does that mean no one believes in it or no one is speculating on it? These two answers are very different. Don't use transfer counts as a reason to buy; when altcoins contract volume and move sideways, after a spike, they often pull back with no bottom. $SOL 🚗💨 The Tesla Roadster "flew" up, but the stock price didn't keep flying. On October 15, Musk showcased the new generation Roadster at the SpaceX test site in Texas: a compressed air thruster completed short-distance flight, aerial attitude adjustment, and landing. He said it was developed in cooperation with SpaceX, planned for production in 2028, with the price still undisclosed. Sounds like science fiction, but the market first surged then cooled off, now down 1.28%.🤔
Why the rise and fall? This car was first revealed in 2017, originally scheduled for production in 2020, delayed all the way to 2028, so the market naturally has doubts. Flying cars face even more regulatory hurdles, with almost no regulations worldwide. Investors are also calculating: Q3 deliveries dropped 2.1% year-over-year, automotive gross margins are under pressure, and Robotaxi commercialization is still climbing. A sports car with no set price, unknown production capacity, and orders can't ease the main business anxiety. Cool as it is, let's first watch production volume and regulation.✈️📉 $TSLA $xTSLA #特斯拉发布新一代Roadster，行情走高 #美国CPI与PPI双超预期，年内能否再加息？ The harshest part of this market situation is not how much it has fallen,
but that it is now "killing both body and mind."
Have you noticed a very strange phenomenon?
ETH is stuck at the 2420 level, unable to go up or down.
If you watch the 4-hour chart, it seems like there is support below, tempting you to buy the dip; but when you look up,
there are several moving averages glaringly pressing down at 2429, 2442, and 2481, as if the bulls have their throats choked, struggling even to breathe.
I just checked the long-short ratio, and 90% of people are buying the dip, with only 10% shorting.
Seeing this data, I’m not panicking; instead, I feel this money is earned very steadily.
Why?
Because the money in the market is limited.
When 90% of retail investors have already spent all their bullets and gone all-in on the long side, who will push the price up?
Expecting the main players to use real money to carry these 90%? Don’t be silly, the main players only use these chips as stepping stones to smash the market.
The current sideways movement is not building a bottom at all; it’s waiting for these 90% of bulls to become completely desperate.
What’s the next script?
Take my advice, the current 2420 is an awkward position; don’t chase shorts, as you can easily get shaken out by fake spikes up and down.
The best move is to wait for it to struggle a bit more, rebound to the 2430-2440 resistance zone, and once volume dries up, decisively enter short.
If it breaks below 2400, it will be a stampede of bulls.
In trading, the final battle is not about skill but about which side you stand on.
Are you waiting for a miracle with those 90% of retail investors, or sharpening your knives with the main players?
$BTC $ETH
$ZEC
#机构资金持续流出，BTC能否企稳？ $MUBARAK left and right handBitcoin suddenly dropped, AI stock perpetual contracts plunged 5% in seconds then rebounded: What happened in the market?
A period of market volatility drew attention: Bitcoin and Ethereum suddenly fell, several major AI stock perpetual contracts dropped about 5% within seconds, then quickly rebounded.
There was no obvious breaking news at the time, and the US stock market was also closed.
What’s worth noting about this kind of market movement is not just how much it fell, but why the price could fluctuate sharply in a short time and then quickly recover.
One possible explanation is insufficient liquidity.
Price depends not only on the willingness of buyers and sellers but also on how much capital in the order book is willing to transact. When market depth is insufficient, a relatively large order can consume multiple price levels of pending orders consecutively, causing the price to quickly deviate from the original level.
If subsequent funds re-enter the market, the price may quickly rebound again. $TSLA $xTSLA #巴克莱推演SpaceX收购特斯拉方案 Can increased energy storage deployment support profits?
In 2026 Q3, actual energy storage deployment was 13.7 GWh, below the previous market expectation of 15.9 GWh. Deployment volume does not equal profit; next, we need to look at the gross margin and cash collection of the energy division. If gross margin and cash flow continue to improve, it will better support the group's performance.Deliveries exceeded expectations, is the profit stable as well?
486,532 vehicles were delivered in 2026 Q3, about 5.3% higher than the company's forecast summarized at the end of September. But sales volume does not equal profit; next, we need to look at the gross margin of automotive excluding credits, group expenses, and operating cash flow; if all three improve together, the recovery will be more solid. $TSLA $xTSLA #特斯拉发布新一代Roadster，行情走高 The total stablecoin market cap is stuck at $302 billion without movement, while Sui chain alone processed $2.4 billion in 24 hours.
In the past 24 hours, stablecoins saw a net inflow of $2.4 billion on the Sui chain, while Ethereum simultaneously absorbed $995.8 million. However, DefiLlama data shows that the total stablecoin market cap has slightly decreased over nearly a month; the overall pool has not grown at all.
What has changed? The money hasn't left the market; it's just moving places. Meanwhile, centralized exchanges (CEX) had a net inflow of 8,237 BTC in the past 7 days, with Binance alone taking in 6,464 BTC. ETFs saw a net outflow of $228.4 million this week. BTC is moving to exchanges, while stablecoins are moving on-chain.
Why is this worth attention? This is not new money entering the market; it's existing funds repositioning. On one side, holders are loosening their positions; on the other, stablecoins are gathering on-chain. These two flows are doing completely opposite things.
Which observation is more supported? The judgment of "rebalancing positions rather than exiting" is more supported. Selling pressure and buying power are both accumulating, but they haven't collided yet.
Next, focus on one thing: whether the nearly $3.4 billion in stablecoins on Sui and Ethereum chains are staying on-chain to earn yield or preparing to be converted into chips. The money has already moved homes; next is whether to start firing or keep waiting. Share your judgment in the comments. $SUI $TSLA $xTSLA Key points to watch in Tesla's earnings report!
Can Robotaxi charging actually make a profit?
Tesla has already commercially deployed Cybercab in Austin. Next, we need to see if the revenue per vehicle can cover insurance, maintenance, and remote assistance costs, and then recoup the vehicle investment. If costs decrease and the payback period shortens, expansion will be more convincing. $CT has already tripled on this trade, shorted at 20x leverage, entered at 0.3723, target marked at 0.3159, +302.98%. Not as thrilling as the previous 50x, but actually a bit more stable.
The trend is giving face; it's not that I'm super skilled, just that I didn't get stopped out during the position holding process, so that's a win. The position can now be lowered, don't fight the last part anymore, take profits first, move the stop loss close to the cost basis, and let the market handle the remaining position.
If you're not in the trade, don't blindly chase shorts based on the chart. CT's low-level rebound is also strong; catching the wick is easier than a relay. This wave follows the same logic as the previous OP and STRK trades—once you make a profit, don't give it back, exit decisively. $BTC $ETH On the ETH liquidation list, long positions account for nearly 90%.
In the past 24 hours, ETH long liquidations reached $62.99 million, while short liquidations were only $8.68 million, with a long-to-short ratio of 7.26:1, and long liquidations making up 88%. Out of the total $317 million liquidations across the entire network, ETH alone contributed $71.97 million, surpassing BTC's $28.84 million, becoming the asset with the largest liquidation volume.
The most striking liquidation occurred at 5 AM: a certain whale opened a $187 million long position with maximum leverage, where 4,890 ETH were liquidated at $2,356, with a position value of $11.74 million, hitting right near today's lowest point. This was not a passive follow-down; the leverage was precisely pierced.
Currently, the observation that "long liquidation pressure has not yet been fully released" is further supported. The liquidation map shows a concentration of $472 million long liquidation intensity below $2,304, while above $2,538 corresponds to a $611 million short position pool. The lower level is closer to the current price, so the long positions' trap is triggered first.
Next, watch one thing: will ETH first clear out the long positions at $2,304, or will it rebound first causing pain to the shorts? The whale's position has already been liquidated; who will be next to be liquidated? $ETH SOL funding rate has turned negative, but 74% of accounts are still long.
This is the most awkward set of signals today: derivatives pricing is weakening, yet the position structure hasn't surrendered. SOL current price is $104.17, 8-hour average funding rate is -0.0211%, shorts are starting to pay longs. Normally, a negative funding rate means bearish sentiment dominates, but on-chain account data shows 74.4% of accounts still hold SOL longs, with Bybit long accounts at 75.8%, and Bitget even higher at 85.3%.
What has changed? While the funding rate turned negative, open interest contracts shrank by 2.0% in 24 hours to 13.7M, with shorts only $1.4M. Money is decreasing, longs are getting hit, but accounts haven't exited.
Why is this worth attention? Because active trades have shifted to sellers: Binance active sells account for 70.1%, active longs only 29.9%. This means new funds are siding with shorts, while existing long accounts are just "waiting for a rebound," not actively bullish.
Which observation is more supported? Currently, the evidence favors "weak consolidation under negative funding rate, rather than a completed bottom formation." Until longs are fully cleared, there isn't enough fuel for a rebound.
Next, watch the liquidation-heavy zone at 101.71. If the price tests this area again and open interest continues to shrink rather than expand, it indicates longs are still passively exiting; if open interest expands again and price stands above $104.17, then today's bearish bias is confirmed. $SOL Bitcoin ETFs saw a net outflow of $228.4 million in a single week, but the number of whale wallets hit a record high.
This is the most divisive set of signals today: traditional funds are withdrawing, while on-chain whales are accumulating.
What has changed? U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs had a combined outflow of $228.4 million this week, with IBIT alone contributing $165.4 million in net outflows. This is not a one-day noise but a directional retreat over the entire week.
Why is this worth noting? Because at the same time, the number of whale wallets holding between 10 and 10,000 BTC rose to a historic peak of 20,338, with large holders continuously accumulating around $82,000. ETF outflows represent accessible traditional funds exiting, while whale accumulation represents structural holders taking in supply. Two groups are acting completely opposite at the same price level.
Which market observation does this support more? Currently, it supports the view that "chips are shifting from weak hands to strong hands." In the past 24 hours, long liquidations totaled $251 million, while shorts only $66.1 million; leveraged longs are being squeezed out. Whales are picking up liquidated chips rather than chasing the rally.
The key focus going forward: whether ETF net outflows are a single-week pullback or the start of a continuous trend. If outflows narrow next week, whales’ accumulation is hedged; if outflows accelerate, even whales won’t withstand the pressure of two selling forces simultaneously.
The true answer to this divergence will only be revealed when next week’s ETF data is released. $BTC $ETH If what Roadster brings this time is just an emotional pulse, then why is the crypto market also a bit restless? Are you seeing a car, or the fuse for the next narrative? My first reaction to this news wasn’t "Tesla has a new release again," but that capital preference is shifting toward "imagination assets." Before the market opened, TSLA once rose 5%, and concepts like flying cars and low-altitude economy in the A-shares also followed, indicating the market is buying not next year’s profits, but the sci-fi vibe of "Tesla×SpaceX." This signal is actually very familiar in crypto: when traditional markets start paying premiums for stories, BTC and ETH usually stabilize risk appetite first, and altcoins then dare to extend outward. But I want to break down the rhythm a bit more. Roadster mass production is expected in 2028, and the Rocket version can’t hit the road yet; in terms of revenue, it’s more like a halo car. What’s really being lifted is valuation imagination, not financial reports. In other words, this is more like the start of a trend, not a continuation phase, and definitely not a distribution phase, because money is looking for new stories, not cashing out old performance. But the problem lies here: the start phase is most easily misread as a "full bull market return." The bullish path is that this kind of sci-fi narrative continues to heat up tech stocks and crypto risk appetite, BTC holds steady, ETH follows the rise, capital preference shifts from defensive targets to high-elasticity sectors, and altcoins related to low-altitude economy, AI, and robotics concepts may first gain emotional premiums. The bearish risk is that once earnings season pulls attention back to auto gross margins, free cash flow, and Q3 data, the story will be forced to give way.Latest news: The Strait of Hormuz reopens
Iran's Foreign Minister's statement "The Strait of Hormuz will reopen within 7 days" is valuable not because of the strait itself, but because it redirects the transmission chain of oil prices—inflation—risk appetite back towards easing. As the geopolitical premium retreats, crude oil prices fall, and the market's fear of the Fed's continued tightening eases by one notch, BTC correspondingly rebounds to 82000, directly reflecting a marginal recovery in macro sentiment.
However, I believe the 82000 level should not be celebrated solely based on the news. The MVRV percentile has just dropped back below 30, a range historically occupied only about 25% of the time, which indeed fits the characteristics of an "accumulation zone." But an accumulation zone does not equal a confirmed bottom; the bottoming process may be prolonged. More importantly, this rebound from around 79000 to 82000 was accompanied by $929 million in leveraged liquidations, and spot buying did not actually keep pace. So my personal narrative is: the easing of geopolitical tensions gave BTC a decent rebound window, but 82000 currently looks more like a "temporary platform" for leveraged sentiment repair rather than a solid bottom driven by spot demand. The warmer the news, the more closely one should watch whether spot trading truly follows with real money. $BTC $ZEC $SOL #霍尔木兹再现水雷威胁，油价风险升温 $APR dropped 47% at 1 PM.
This is not negative news; it's a typical liquidity gap.
The 4-hour candlestick at 12 PM today: open 0.0391, high 0.0391, low 0.0229, close 0.0254 — a single candle dropped 41%. The volume was 42 million tokens, while APR's usual average volume is about 1.5 million tokens, making this candle's volume 28 times the average.
For small-cap coins during low liquidity periods, a large sell order without support causes a direct price gap. It's not that the bears are strong; the buy orders just haven't been placed yet.
Looking before 12:00: 8 consecutive 4H candles ranged between 0.038-0.041 with volumes of 1-1.5 million tokens, a typical controlled narrow consolidation. The longer the consolidation, the greater the directional momentum. Once broken, programmed stop-loss chains trigger, causing a drop much deeper than fundamentals-driven moves.
APR fell from 0.046 to 0.024, wiping out nearly half its market cap. After such a flash crash, there are usually two outcomes: low-volume sideways trading waiting for the market to forget, or the project team buying back to give bulls a foothold. Currently, no fundamental deterioration is seen; it's purely a liquidity issue.
What do you think? For a flash crash without fundamental support, is the rebound just an opportunity for trapped holders to exit? $APR #NetflixQ3AdsAndMargins Why might a company's wealth myth have already been completed before going public?
Jeff Yan, founder of Hyperliquid, proposed a thought-provoking perspective: if a company's valuation reaches trillions of dollars at the time of its IPO, then most of its wealth creation process may have already occurred before going public.
Behind this lies a practical issue: ordinary investors can participate in a company's growth, but may not be able to join in its earliest, lowest-valuation stages.
A company typically goes through multiple rounds of financing from startup to IPO. Early investors bear higher uncertainty but may enter at a lower valuation.
By the time the company matures and gains market recognition, its valuation may have increased significantly.
At this point, ordinary investors can finally buy in through the public market, but what they buy is no longer the same asset held by early investors.
Of course, this does not mean that post-IPO stocks have no room for growth, nor does it mean early investments are guaranteed to profit. Early-stage companies can also fail, equity can be diluted, and funds may be locked up for a long time.
What truly deserves discussion is the issue of access to investment opportunities.
If more and more companies leave their main growth stages in the private market, then the wealth growth that public market investors can share may only be a part of the company's lifecycle.
For the same company, early investment and post-IPO purchase differ completely in purchase price, risk undertaken, and potential future returns.· Price and Funding Rate: Current price is about $104.17. The average funding rate is negative (around -0.0211%), meaning shorts pay longs, but this mainly reflects holding pressure under price weakness rather than a pure bearish signal.
· Open Interest and Liquidations: Total open contracts across the network are about $4.64B**, down 2.0% in 24 hours. In the past 24 hours, long liquidations totaled $12.3M, shorts only $1.4M, indicating the decline is mainly driven by longs being passively exited.
· Long-Short Divergence: Although 74.4% of accounts hold long positions, selling dominates active trades (Binance active selling accounts for 70.1%), showing many longs are passively waiting while new trades tend to sell or hedge. Remember that the final price of a triple-leveraged long ETF contract tends to approach zero.
If you hold it long-term, you will suffer big losses.
This is mathematically proven.
Many people have a misconception that as long as the storage sector rallies, with Micron $MU, SanDisk $SNDK, and Hynix $SKHYNIX prices returning to their starting points, the triple-leveraged semiconductor ETF will also follow the ETF index back to the starting point. ❌ This is completely wrong.
For example, if both the initial ETF and the triple-leveraged ETF index start at 100,
assuming the ETF drops 10% and then rises 11.1%,
the price goes 100—90—100, returning to the initial 100.
Correspondingly, the triple-leveraged ETF fluctuates by dropping 30% and then rising 33.3%,
with prices going 100—70—93.33, which cannot return to the initial 100.
Therefore, the triple-leveraged ETF is anchored to the daily 3x gain, not 3x the initial price. The triple-leveraged ETF is only suitable for short-term holding, not long-term.
#台积电Q3净利润超预期，盈利创历史新高