Orbit Post Sitemap
The drowsiness accumulated from working during the day was just diluted by this news. The room is left with only the screen lit; I originally planned to scroll through and then sleep, but seeing "4.9% of total supply," my hand stopped again. 🌙
According to PR Newswire, Bitmine announced an increase of 12,535 ETH in the past week; as of October 18, 2026, the total holdings reached 6,041,481 ETH, accounting for 4.9% of the total ETH supply.
Calming down, I think this is somewhat positive for $ETH sentiment, but not enough to indicate a comprehensive strengthening of market demand. What really keeps me awake is: will the actions of a single company be taken by everyone as a thermometer for the entire market?
Continuing to increase holdings for a week at least shows that this company is still increasing its ETH exposure, which can send a positive signal to the market. But one firm buying firmly does not mean other funds are following; and the total holdings are cumulative results, so they cannot all be counted as new demand this week. If the discussion only focuses on the 6.04 million ETH, then the significance of this 12,535 ETH increase might be exaggerated—this is my concern, not a price judgment.
A reminder to myself: don’t take a whale’s holdings report as your direct market answer. Who else is still awake at this hour, and what ETH signals are they watching? After this news, will you be more inclined to confirm whether other funds are following, or first look at whether price and volume respond?#AMDQ3HeliosRevenue Morgan Stanley is cutting $AMD's GPU demand forecast by 43.3%, from 14.1M to 8M units.
The forecast spans from 2026 through 2030 and was just released a few days ago.
Would be curious if anyone knows the *why* behind this significant of a cut?
Lisa Su was just in Taiwan talking about significant demand, so much that it was tough to keep up.#Institutional funds weaken, who will see inflows first, BTC or ETH?
📊 【Funding: Big money is retreating】
📉 Since mid-October, $BTC ETF net outflows reached 228 million, $ETH is even worse, with outflows exceeding 320 million.
🩸 Institutional buying cools down, Galaxy Research directly points out: the supply-demand gap within the year is as high as 127,300 BTC.
📉 When the city gate catches fire, the fish in the moat suffer; last week, 141 altcoins fell an average of 14%, liquidity contracted rapidly.
🔍 【Rebound truth: all thanks to short covering】
BTC’s rebound to 82,000 is entirely due to crude oil falling and US stock futures rebounding, restoring sentiment. The core driver of the rise is short covering, with hardly any new buying following. The 80,000-85,000 meat grinder range remains unbroken.
⚔️ 【Brutal divergence between BTC and ETH】
During macro contraction, institutions prioritize protecting their "BTC base positions." So when funds flow back, BTC definitely ranks first, ETH has to step aside. Ethereum has bled for three consecutive weeks, showing extreme weakness, closely watching the 2330 support level below. As for $ZEC, its narrative is too independent; even if the market flows back, it may not benefit.
#SpaceX上市后首份完整季度财报将揭晓 #奈飞增长或放缓，广告业务成新看点 Bitcoin and Ethereum can exhibit completely different market trends under the same market environment, which in itself is an underestimated piece of information. When $BTC rises, $ETH continues to weaken—what does this divergence indicate? My judgment is: the breadth of the rebound is more worth monitoring than the height of the rebound. $BTC, as the leading asset in the crypto market, naturally attracts most of the attention and incremental funds; whereas $ETH's performance is more like a mirror reflecting whether investors are willing to take on broader market risks. The former is a thermometer of confidence, the latter a touchstone of risk appetite. When the two diverge, focusing solely on Bitcoin's gains can lead to wrong conclusions. This is exactly why I track both the BTC/ETH ratio and their individual prices simultaneously. A widening ratio and relative bleeding of ETH means funds are concentrated in a few assets, indicating a narrow market structure; a converging ratio and relative recovery of ETH indicate that risk appetite is truly spreading. A healthy market cannot rely on just one asset to hold the stage. The key signal now is: if $BTC continues to rise strongly while $ETH keeps depreciating, this recovery is most likely still a narrow-based rebound, and participants' optimism should be discounted; conversely, if ETH starts to outperform relatively, that confirms an improvement in breadth. This is not a price prediction but a structural interpretation—the direction of the ratio reveals the true attitude of funds earlier than individual coin candlesticks. A referenced argument: Bitcoin determines the height of the market, Ethereum determines the breadth; a rise without breadth is ultimately just a celebration for a few.📊 #At first, I also thought that BTC and ETH ETFs were flowing out together this month.
Counting the trading days on Farside this month, it doesn't add up. BTC spot ETFs had net inflows on half of the days, while ETH had only 1 day, which was last Tuesday with $24.8 million.
Combined, BTC had a net outflow of about $610 million this month, and ETH about $960 million. The ETH ETF pool is much smaller than BTC's, yet more funds flowed out, and almost every day.
So, as for who will see inflows first, I think BTC has already been in a tug-of-war with funds coming in and out, while ETH hasn't started yet. The count is up to last Friday; today's data will only be available after the US stock market opens tonight.
If ETH shows two consecutive days of net inflows this week, I'll admit I was wrong.
#机构资金转弱，BTC与ETH谁先迎来回流？ #奈飞增长或放缓，广告业务成新看点 Steadily exceeding expectations In the futures market, when a major player continuously accumulates, people usually focus first on inventory concentration rather than assuming the market will rise just because they hear "increased holdings." When I see this kind of news, I also tend to separately weigh the new additions and the total holdings.
According to PR Newswire, Bitmine increased its holdings by 12,535 $ETH in the past week. As of October 18, 2026, its total holdings reached 6,041,481 $ETH, accounting for 4.9% of the total ETH supply.
My judgment is that this news is somewhat positive for holders' confidence, but what matters more is concentration rather than the buying strength of this week. The new additions are not large relative to its existing holdings, so the massive total holdings should not be treated as newly generated demand; conversely, holding 4.9% of the total supply means this company's holdings are more likely to influence market sentiment.
Crypto differs from traditional commodities; corporate holdings are not like factory raw materials, with no production or consumption clues to judge from. If the market equates corporate holdings directly with long-term removal from circulation, I think that is an overreach, as the information does not explain the subsequent use of these coins.
I prefer to see it as a window to observe the chip structure rather than a directional signal. Are there friends who have also transitioned from traditional markets? When facing such corporate coin hoarding, do you raise your guard like you would with commodity inventory concentration, or do you think the two are fundamentally incomparable?MicroStrategy, the largest Bitcoin bull, has issued another announcement, continuing to add 267 $BTC to its holdings.
MicroStrategy founder Saylor announced again: this time spending $21.75 million to buy 267 $BTC, while also repurchasing $193 million of preferred shares $STRC.
Looking back at MicroStrategy's entire operation, from 4,603 coins in August, down to 250 last week, and 267 this week, a five-time decline, they continue buying Bitcoin but at a slower pace.
However, in the same announcement, the real action is elsewhere. The repurchase of preferred shares worth $193 million is 8.9 times the amount spent on buying coins.
Most importantly: he raised the repurchase plan scale from $2 billion to $3 billion.
So MicroStrategy's current logic is very clear: slow down the pace of buying Bitcoin, allocate more funds to repurchasing its own preferred shares, and improve its capital structure. #NetflixQ3AdsAndMargins I think Netflix does outperform because of the ads#NetflixQ3AdsAndMargins #嘉信开放BTC转账，德银布局托管
The leader has something to say
Deutsche Bank and Charles Schwab have taken another step forward in crypto business. Deutsche Bank plans to launch BTC and ETH custody services for institutions and enterprises within weeks, while Charles Schwab has started phased support for qualified clients to make external wallet transfers. Standard Chartered and BNY Mellon are also expanding custody.
I believe this is long-term infrastructure, but with limited short-term impact. A comment in the discussion section hit the mark: Deutsche Bank's custody will first be implemented in Germany, and expansion in Asia will wait until 2027, making it a long-term option rather than an immediate benefit. The channel is becoming smoother, and the compliance ceiling is rising, but converting this into actual capital inflow will take time.
Market reaction is mild, BTC slightly up 0.54%, ETH slightly up 0.52%. Today, I shorted BTC at 82,800, exited at 80,200, pocketing 2,600 points profit, now in a flat position. Next, I will watch if the 80,000 level can hold. If it holds, expect consolidation; if broken, expect deeper correction. Resistance above remains between 84,000 and 85,000.
Bank custody is a slow variable, not a directional switch. BTC short-term still follows macro trends. Do not chase highs or panic sell lows, wait for signals, and set stop-loss orders properly. $BTC $ETH $ZEC
The above analysis is time-sensitive; orders must have stop-losses set. Good luck.Screenshots of 50x and 100x returns flooding the planet, first let's look at a set of data to calm down.
With 100x leverage, if the price moves less than 1% in the opposite direction, you could be liquidated. In the past 30 days, $BTC had 27 days with intraday volatility exceeding 1%, averaging about 2.6% back and forth daily.
Number of days intraday volatility reached the liquidation threshold (rough estimate of liquidation distance ≈ 1/leverage):
· 100x (≈1%): 27 days
· 50x (≈2%): 19 days
· 20x (≈5%): 1 day
· 10x (≈10%): 0 days
At high leverage, even if you pick the right direction, it's not enough; if your entry timing is slightly off, a normal intraday fluctuation can liquidate you. If beginners really want to trade contracts, start with low leverage, small positions, and use stop-loss.
The screenshots only show those who survived.
Not investment advice | Data: OKX BTC/USDT daily (UTC) 9/19–10/18
#Bitcoin #Contracts #交易之声：你的经验值得被听到 To start with a dose of cold water, I don't take "continuing to focus on crypto" as a signal of new funds entering the market. According to Bloomberg, Multicoin Capital, which manages $2.7 billion in assets, stated it will continue to focus on digital assets and will not follow peers in expanding its investment scope to artificial intelligence and robotics technology. This is a statement about investment boundaries, not an announcement of increased positions.
I am cautious for two reasons. First, the $2.7 billion refers to assets under management, not cash waiting to be invested; interpreting this figure directly as potential buying power in the crypto market confuses existing holdings with new capital. Second, partner Spencer Applebaum emphasized that the professional advantages and resource accumulation in the crypto field are difficult to transfer directly; blindly shifting focus would weaken competitiveness. I prefer to understand this as maintaining their circle of competence rather than asserting that crypto has more opportunity than AI, and certainly not as a reason to raise valuations across the entire sector.
However, bullish people might agree: at least this institution has not chosen to broaden its investment scope. If we later see continuous new investments and portfolio projects with real demand and revenue growth, I would raise my evaluation of this news. For now, I stand on the side that "the emotional significance outweighs the financial significance." Regarding this news, are you bullish or bearish? State your reasons: do you value the institution staying put, or are you more concerned about new funds and project realization?From zero to losing 19.78 million, it took him less than 10 hours
A new wallet rushed into Hype at 11 PM last night, opening a 25x short position of 13,826 ETH at an average price of 2366.
But ETH kept grinding upwards.
With 25x leverage and the direction reversed, the margin was instantly breached. The system didn’t liquidate him all at once but sliced his position bit by bit over 10 hours. A total of 8,163 ETH were liquidated, worth 19.78 million USD. He was literally tortured alive.
The craziest part is, he still tightly holds the remaining 8,849 ETH short position, with a new liquidation price at 2430. If ETH pushes up just a bit more, the rest of the position will be wiped out too.
Entering the market with tens of millions of dollars, the first thing he did was go all-in with a 25x short. This isn’t trading, it’s gambling with life. And these high-leverage new wallets often become the best fuel for the market.
What do you think, can his remaining short position hold until ETH drops below 2366? Discuss in the comments.
The above is compiled from on-chain data and does not constitute any trading advice.
$ETH $BTC #霍尔木兹重开方案仍有效，油价能否继续回落？
🔥The reopening plan for the Strait of Hormuz, to be honest, is now just a carrot dangling in front of a donkey.
It looks effective, but has Iran really taken any action? No. As long as they keep bickering over there, oil prices can't just drop decisively.
Even if they do drop a bit, so what?
The 6.3% PPI from the day before yesterday is right there, inflation's bottom layer has already been stripped away. US Treasury yields are still sucking blood at a high 5.6%. Now you expect a rumor of geopolitical easing to rescue the Fed's rate cut expectations? Don't be ridiculous.
Looking back at the market, Bitcoin is stuck around 84,000, caught in a dilemma, and options volatility has hit a five-year low. All the funds have gotten smart; no one wants to bet on direction at this time. Everyone is waiting, waiting for something certain.
I suggest keeping your base positions untouched, and let your USDT lie in wealth management to earn interest.
In this market, more trading means more mistakes. Wait until these macro boots really drop, and the market can't hold back from choosing a direction, then we jump in to pick up bargains. For now? Just sit back and watch the show. $CL The median amplitude of 84 coins has dropped to 90% of the past 40 days, while TIA is at 1.78 times.
This means the whole market is getting quieter, but TIA is getting noisier, which is unusual.
TIA has averaged a daily swing of 15.85% over the past 10 days, compared to only 8.91% in the previous 40 days.
In this cycle, it rose from 0.293 to 0.7691, an increase of 162%.
On October 17, it hit a 100-day intraday high of 0.7691.
But it closed at 0.659 that day, with an upper shadow of 14%, pushed back after the spike.
It then fell for three consecutive days, now at 0.6047, down 21.4% from the high.
I think the increased amplitude is not a signal of trend but a signal of divergence.
The price can hit new highs, but the close is hammered down, indicating someone is selling around 0.77.
Buyers are still there, just unwilling to chase higher, so the price swings back and forth daily.
Whoever breaks first in this market will determine the direction.
The dividing line is at 0.60.
That is the starting point of the big bullish candle on October 16 that rose 15.97%.
If it breaks below 0.60, that bullish candle was in vain, and the story changes from a breakout to a false breakout.
Holding 0.60 is necessary to talk about a second attempt at 0.7691.
I tend to think it will try again because the drop was on low volume; today's trading volume is only half the average.
$TIA
#GettingQuieterAndGettingNoisier Conclusion first: This morning's rebound is real, but the strength is fake. BTC rose from 80,680 in the early session to 82,814, now at 82,493, up 0.73% in 24 hours with a 2.6% amplitude. Looks lively, right? But looking at the futures data reveals the truth: the funding rate is 0.0037%, basically zero. To translate: those going long don't even want to pay this little interest; they say they're bullish, but their wallets are honest. Open Interest is 30,311 BTC (2.49 billion USD), and leverage hasn't followed. ETH is at 2,421 (-0.03%), stagnant; SOL is the most active at 105.2 (+0.92%), but its funding rate is only 0.0019%. In plain language: - 82,800–83,000 is a barrier; until it breaks through, don't mistake the rebound for a reversal - Funding rate near zero + no increase in Open Interest = no one is taking over this wave; bulls are waiting - China's Q3 GDP growth is 4.5%, macro data is relatively warm, crypto is not responding today. Looking ahead to this afternoon and tonight: my view is that 82,800 won't be broken and a pullback to 81,500 is more likely. Falsification condition is fixed: if BTC closes above 82,800 before 9 PM tonight and holds, my judgment is void and I'll admit it first thing tomorrow. The data was pulled at 12:15 today from refresh_market for Binance spot + futures real numbers, not just guessing. If you want to see what I tested, comment.#usd1 stablecoin market cap decreased by over $400 million in two weeks
[Old Leek Observation] On-chain research data shows that from October 6 to 15, the supply of USD1 on the three main chains—Ethereum, BNB Chain, and Solana—decreased by about $385 million, a drop of approximately 8.7%, with the total supply falling to about $4.04 billion. Observing a broader nearly two-week period, the decline has approached over $400 million. There are two points worth noting in this news.
The first is that redemption does not equal de-pegging. On-chain data indicates that this round of supply reduction mainly came from redemption and burning on Ethereum and $BNB Chain. During the same period, the price of $USD1 still basically fluctuated around $1 and did not experience a sustained large-scale de-pegging due to the supply decrease. Therefore, the clearer current signal is a contraction in circulating supply rather than a stablecoin run having occurred.
The second is the impact of large funds. The supply on Ethereum decreased by about $185 million, and BNB Chain decreased by about $200 million. The research report also points out that about $200 million of the redemptions on BNB Chain came from the same untagged address. In other words, a few large redemptions can significantly change the overall scale of USD1. However, on-chain addresses cannot directly prove the identity of the ultimate holder, nor can redemption motives be judged solely based on transaction records. #NetflixQ3AdsAndMargins
*Netflix Q1'26E Beat - Short Summary:*
*1. Ads:* >50% of new sign-ups on ad-tier + Oct price hikes = higher ARPU.
*2. Live/Sports:* WWE/NFL/Boxing drove low churn + 8-10M net adds into Q1.
*3. Extra members:* 2-3M more paid sharing adds at 100% margin.
=> $10.25B -> $10.78BThe day after tomorrow, Solana is about to undergo the biggest consensus layer operation since its inception.
On October 21, the Alpenglow upgrade will officially launch on the mainnet, reducing the final confirmation time from 12.8 seconds directly down to 150 milliseconds. But today, the hottest topic in the community isn't this speed, but its cost.
The cost of 150 milliseconds is a sharp increase in the hardware threshold for validators.
Alpenglow requires nodes to be equipped with at least a 128-core CPU and 1TB of memory, directly eliminating about 22% of old devices. Even more troublesome is geographic concentration. In August this year, a routing failure at TeraSwitch caused 28.8% of staked SOL to go offline for 33 minutes, nearly hitting the chain halt threshold. The upgrade can improve fault tolerance but cannot solve the root problem of physical hosting concentration.
On one side is extreme performance, on the other is disguised centralization. Solana is betting that the market can accept this trade-off.
But whales have clearly accepted it. On October 9, Jump Crypto's Firedancer wallet staked another 454,000 SOL, worth $49.81 million. SOL's current price is 105, up 2.2% in 24 hours, and the price remains firmly above 100.
My judgment: In the first two days after the upgrade goes live, the narrative for $SOL will be only one thing—speed. No one will check the hardware list. But when the sentiment fades, that 128-core threshold will become the new story.
At the 105 level, the bet is on the 150 milliseconds the day after tomorrow, or the node list three months later.
Discuss in the comments below👇 【$USD1 Evaporates $400 Million in Two Weeks, Stablecoins Also Depend on Whales】
The stablecoin USD1, issued by World Liberty Financial, a project associated with the Trump family, saw its market cap shrink by about $401 million in just two weeks, dropping from $4.43 billion to $4.02 billion, a decline of approximately 9.1%. The price of USD1 remains basically pegged to $1; what decreased was the circulating supply, not a crash in the coin price.
From October 6 to 15, redemptions of about $185 million and $200 million occurred on Ethereum and BNB Chain respectively, with about $200 million on BNB Chain coming from a single unknown address. The supply on Solana remained basically unchanged during the same period, indicating this is not simply a cross-chain transfer but closer to actual redemption.
What is more concerning is that the supply of USD1 on Ethereum dropped by 11.45% during the same period, significantly exceeding USDC's 2.18% and USDT's 0.76%. The overall market contraction explains part of this but not the entire difference.
USD1 is preparing to transfer custody from BitGo to a trust company under World Liberty, and its supply is highly influenced by a few large holders. What can be confirmed now is large redemptions, but it cannot be confirmed that this reflects a loss of confidence in the project. If the supply continues to decline and redemptions accelerate, that would be more worrisome; if the issuer's handover goes smoothly and supply grows again, this contraction may just be a temporary adjustment. The tug-of-war range between macro pause and capital confrontation at 82,000 — 84,246 is the threshold for trend confirmation. Wash's speech lowered rate hike expectations, whales are continuously accumulating, but ETF outflows and the weak technical structure mean the market is still waiting for a catalyst to break the deadlock. The FOMC meeting will be the next key point; before that, respecting the range and waiting for confirmation is safer than predicting direction. $BTC $ETH $ZEC #奈飞增长或放缓，广告业务成新看点 Bitcoin's largest bullish leader MicroStrategy has issued another announcement, continuing to add 267 $BTC
MicroStrategy founder Saylor announced again: this time spending $21.75 million to buy 267 $BTC, while also repurchasing $STRC preferred shares worth $193 million.
Looking back at MicroStrategy's entire operation, from 4,603 coins in August, to 250 coins last week, and 267 coins this week. Five consecutive decreases, still buying Bitcoin but at a slower pace.
In the same announcement, the real action is elsewhere. Repurchasing preferred shares worth $193 million, which is 8.9 times the amount spent on buying coins.
Most importantly: he raised the repurchase plan scale from $2 billion to $3 billion.
So MicroStrategy's current logic is very clear: slow down the pace of buying Bitcoin, allocate more funds to repurchasing its own preferred shares, and improve its capital structure.#特斯拉交付超预期后盈利修复成焦点
Tesla's recent delivery volume exceeded market expectations, but "sales recovery" does not equal "profit guarantee."
Key points to observe:
* Profit test of volume and price substitution: If sales growth is achieved by compromising vehicle prices or through promotional subsidies, automotive gross margins may continue to be under pressure.
* Fundamental divergence: Market focus has shifted from simply "shipment scale" to "profitability per vehicle" and free cash flow.
* Valuation support key: Only by accelerating the monetization progress of AI and energy storage businesses can the core profitability structure be truly restored, dispelling market doubts about growth momentum. #Institutional funds weaken, who will see the return flow first, BTC or ETH?
$BTC $ETH
I will look at BTC first. It's not because it fell less that it means the bottom is reached, but because when the market contracts, institutions usually return first to assets with deeper liquidity. From 10/12 to 10/16, BTC spot ETFs had a net outflow of $228.4 million, ETFs had a net outflow of $320.1 million, and ETH faced even greater selling pressure.
Galaxy Research estimates that ETF and corporate treasury buying still cannot absorb the BTC released by long-term holders. The cumulative supply-demand gap this year is about negative 127,300 coins.
Altcoins fell an average of 14% last week, BTC about 3%; trading volume and stablecoin supply are also contracting, indicating overall capital withdrawal, with no clear rotation or absorption yet.
If I were to rank the return flow order, I currently lean towards BTC stabilizing first, and ETH then watching the capital sentiment. But at present, no clear return flow signal is seen yet. Whether ETF outflows can narrow is the next key point to watch.#CircleQ3USDCGrowth Stablecoins have an easily overlooked aspect: they don't need to rise to create commercial value.
In cases of cross-border transfers, corporate settlements, and dollar transfers, what users care about is cost, speed, and whether the money will arrive successfully, not how much it will increase tomorrow.
Circle's expansion into emerging markets is worth watching, but announcing market entry and generating real payment volume are two different things.
I want to later see the actual transfer volumes, active users, and progress in compliance.
If the money really starts to get accustomed #SpaceXQ3Earnings
*SpaceX Q1'26E Beat - 3 Drivers:*
*1. Starlink scale:* 6M+ subs = ∼$800M/mo recurring, high-margin revenue from Mini/Aviation deals.
*2. Launch record:* 48 Falcon launches vs 41 in Q4, more $67M-$150M commercial/NASA missions.
*3. Government payouts:* Starship + Starshield + HLS milestones triggering in Q1.
Result: Est. $4.8B -> $5.6B QoQ.Total: +$355M vs +$168M yesterday
• BTC: +$245M (largest in 5 days)
• ETH: +$110M (2x yesterday)
Why it's better:
1. Dip buying: BTC held above $62k support, triggered ETF bid from BlackRock IBIT and Fidelity.
2. ETH catch-up: ETH/BTC ratio bounce + staking ETF chatter = first $100M+ day for ETH this week.
3. No GBTC drag: GBTC outflows finally flat, so net inflows are clean.
Risk-on flow is back.Three Faces of the Liquidation Night: Short Squeeze, Stalemate, Long Burial 💥
$ETH: Shorts were forced to exit by the rebound 🚪. 24h liquidations: 56.37 million shorts, 42.41 million longs; 4h liquidations: 39.1 million shorts, only 400k longs; 1h liquidations: 99.8% shorts. Price pulled back above 2,400, but the positive funding rate indicates longs are still paying; accounts are mostly long, with few active buyers: existing longs, little new money. The $10.1 million liquidation order near 2,398 is the next test.
$BTC: Longs and shorts are in a tug of war 🤝. Liquidations are nearly balanced, with a tug between 80,684 and 82,500. ETF net outflow of 228 million, whale deposits halted, marginal selling pressure easing. Above 82,500–83,000 is a buildup of short fuel; below 79,800–80,000 there are 97.87 million 40x leveraged long positions.
$ZEC: The leverage funeral is not over ⚰️. Long liquidations 9.9 million, short liquidations 4.24 million, more than twice longs. After a 460% surge, high leverage stacked; CPI was just a pin, the stampede is the knife, with long liquidations once accounting for 88.7%. 18,900 stolen ZEC flowed into privacy pools, combined with NU7 countdown and expected rule changes, thin liquidity sees longs and shorts cutting each other.
#机构资金转弱，BTC与ETH谁先迎来回流？ #SpaceX上市后首份完整季度财报将揭晓 #奈飞增长或放缓，广告业务成新看点 When the market weakens, several coins that were heavily hyped earlier are basically being neglected.
A few coins that might still have hype opportunities are: $STRK, $BCH, $NEAR, and there might be a narrative reversal.
STRK is the most dramatic. The community voted to become an independent quantum-resistant L1, with 99.9% approval and 180 million tokens participating.
There was already a wave of hype around the quantum resistance narrative before, and the price rose a lot. Although I personally don't believe it, the market still has quite a bit of capital voting.
Recently, the unlocking of 127 million tokens a few days ago pushed the price down, and active wallet addresses on-chain also dropped by 63%.
NEAR is the most undervalued technology play. Former Solana Mert joined the council, which the market interprets as technical endorsement of NEAR's privacy/confidentiality intentions, possibly leading to an alliance with Zcash.
Currently priced around $5, it has dropped 18% in 7 days, oversold. What it lacks is narrative exposure, not technology. Once the privacy sector heats up, it has the greatest elasticity.
BCH is a relatively stable veteran. CME launched BCH futures today, and this veteran payment coin is finally entering traditional derivatives.
Currently around 276, the price is because everyone worries that institutions will short after futures launch, so it's considered an oversold state with everyone watching.
So after the short sellers enter these days, our chances of entering the spot market are pretty good. By late October, the real directional choice is coming fast!
$BTC
Held the uptrend line at 80,000 and climbed back above 82,000, proving the bulls' defense is still intact, but the price hasn't reclaimed the previous drop's high point, and the MACD hasn't truly turned bullish. #OKX 4-hour open interest rose with the rebound, funding rates remain positive, current rise is still driven by contract funds, while spot market follow-through is not obvious.
The two red circles on the daily chart both look like sideways consolidation but differ in nature: the left side completed turnover between 76,000-82,000 before a volume breakout; the right side has seen lower highs since falling from 87,400, with volume increasing on declines and shrinking on rebounds, indicating many chips remain to be cashed out between 83,000-86,000.
ETF feedback is more direct.
In the past two weeks, ETFs saw a net outflow of about $907 million, with another $82.4 million outflow on October 16. Institutions haven't fully exited but aren't aggressively accumulating either.
Macro is also contradictory.
The probability of a rate hike in October has dropped to about 12%-15%, and US Treasury yields have fallen from highs; however, September CPI rose to 3.7%, and December rate hike expectations are near 89%. Short-term pressure eases but doesn't mean liquidity is easing again.
My judgment: For the rest of October, expect a rebound repair phase, not a direct main rally.
80,000 decides defense, 85,000 decides offense. Within this range, patiently waiting for confirmation is more important than rushing to judge bull or bear.🔍 An increase of 4,045 units in one go, but the real question is where the money for the purchase came from. When I see this kind of news, I usually look for funding clues first, and put the holdings leaderboard later.
According to the SEC 8-K document cited by the information, Strive bought 4,045 BTC at an average price of about $82,803 from October 12 to 16, 2026, bringing the total holdings to 36,818 BTC. Among them, 2,822 BTC were disclosed on October 14, so the entire week's amount should not be counted as newly disclosed actions.
An interesting detail here: the purchase scale and average price are explained, but the source of funds is not disclosed in this material. I believe this news has more observational value for the company's Bitcoin reserve strategy than explanatory power for short-term price movements. The increase in holdings indicates that allocation actions did occur; but without financing costs and repayment arrangements, it is difficult to judge whether this accumulation can be sustained, and ordinary users cannot directly apply the company's decision logic.
Here is my speculation: if subsequent disclosures show longer funding terms and controllable repayment pressure, then this increase looks more like a long-term reserve layout; if it relies on continuous financing, the market must simultaneously examine expansion capacity and financing constraints. Don't rush to conclusions yet; the purchase itself does not explain all the motives behind it.
I will continue to monitor the source of funds. In the next disclosure, would you rather check the financing costs or whether BTC has been pledged? Let's watch the follow-up together and see whose speculation is closer.#NetflixQ3AdsAndMargins #NetflixQ3AdsAndMargins I think $NFLX the iconic company is in a tough spot.
The slower growth comments from their Co-CEO this week will be blamed on a shift to live programming.
I don't think that's the actual issue. Live programming does contribute lower watch hours per dollar of content spend… but it also over-indexes in terms of generating new engaged members… which should greatly offset the headwind. #MetaQ3AISpendingOutlook Amazon raised its 2026 capital expenditure guidance from about $200 billion to about $220 billion, with management explaining that the main reason is the rising cost of memory
Alphabet raised from 180 to 190 billion to 195 to 205 billion, and Meta raised the minimum from 125 billion to 130 billion (the upper limit of 145 billion remained unchanged).
Microsoft, due to a change in lease accounting standards, the numbers cannot be directly compared, so I did not include them. AI bills are now partly due to higher memory prices.
This is the latest version after the quarterly report $IONQ IonQ is currently in a short-term divergence state of "fundamentals improving, per-share value declining." Revenue growth of 287% and the upwardly revised guidance prove that demand has not collapsed. The Superion roadmap and collaborations with Nvidia, SDT, and others are also building credibility for the commercialization narrative in 2027–2028. However, the full stock acquisition of Elisity in October and the $2 billion equity financing have forced the market to reprice the "cost of growth." Before the Q3 actual data is released in the November earnings report and the Superion 256 delivery schedule is further clarified, the stock price is more likely to be in a phase of event digestion and valuation rebuilding rather than the start of a trend reversal. $ENA
Ethena's USDe aims to hold a dollar value through crypto collateral paired with short perpetual positions. In good markets, funding rates can reward that structure. When funding turns negative, the same mechanism comes under pressure. Anyone following ENA is really following derivatives conditions, which makes it a different risk profile from a typical DeFi token.$TRX
Tron's relevance comes less from flashy apps and more from stablecoin transfers. A large share of USDT movement has happened on the network, which makes it a payments rail for many users. That focus is a strength, but also a dependency: regulatory shifts around stablecoins or a change in where USDT settles could affect it directly.NEAR at $5, would you still dare to hold it?
From $6 crashing down to $5, leveraged longs got liquidated, and the whole network is calling NEAR an "outdated AI chain"—but ETFs are quietly buying, and Intents recorded $4.7 billion in transactions in one month. So is this a shakeout or a run for safety?
Let's look at the surface first: The pullback is scary, but volume is shrinking
Recently, NEAR has pulled back 15%-18% from around $6, now oscillating between $4.95-$5.03. Daily RSI is 53-54, neutral; MACD is converging with weak momentum; volume has dropped from highs.
This is a leverage cleanup, not a trend reversal.
A real top-down drop shows high volume selling, not a low-volume slow decline. This move looks more like "shaking off the undecided holders."
First point: BTC/ETH ETFs are flowing out, NEAR ETF is seeing net inflows
Bitwise's NEAR spot ETF (NRR) has had continuous net inflows since its late September launch, holding about 15.7 million NEAR, roughly $79 million, and plans to stake for 5% yield.
While BTC and ETH ETFs are seeing overall outflows, NEAR ETF still has net inflows. This indicates institutions view it not as a "shitcoin allocation" but as an independent asset.
Second point: NEAR is not just an AI narrative; it already has real revenue
Many still treat NEAR as an "AI concept chain," which is a major misconception.
NEAR Intents cumulative transaction volume has exceeded $33 billion, with $4.7-$4.8 billion in September alone, a significant month-over-month increase. More importantly, fee income already supports buyback and burn. Inflation has dropped from 5% to 2.5%, with proposals to reduce it further to 1.6%.
Additionally, partnerships like Sunrise connecting to the Solana market, Brave browser integrating NEAR AI private inference, and post-quantum secure accounts launching on mainnet—you may dislike its price, but you can't say it hasn't been active.
Third point: Technicals have reached a critical battleground
Support levels: $4.80-$5.00 (current bull-bear dividing line) → $4.50-$4.76 (strong support) → $4.30
Resistance levels: $5.15-$5.30 (recent highs/Bollinger upper band) → $5.50-$5.80 → $6.00 (previous high psychological barrier) → $7.50 (mid-term target)
Daily moving averages remain bullishly aligned; price is well above the 200-day MA ($2.3-$2.7) and 50-day MA ($3.9-$4.1). Weekly RSI is 68, not overbought; daily RSI is 53, neutral.
But the $5.30 level is crucial—breaking and holding above confirms a new uptrend; falling below $4.76 with volume could accelerate downside.
Also, a vulnerability related to Intents in mid-October involved about $3.8 million; the team has recovered most of the funds.
Bull vs. Bear, you decide
On one side:
NEAR ETF sees net inflows while BTC/ETH ETFs flow out
Intents cumulative $33 billion volume, fees support buyback and burn
Inflation down from 5% to 2.5%, with further cuts proposed
Integration with Solana, Brave, and post-quantum security launched
Daily MAs bullish, pullback on shrinking volume
On the other side:
Macro is hawkish; low probability of big rate cuts at late October FOMC
BTC oscillating around $82.5k, ETFs had over $200 million net outflow last week
Aftershocks from October vulnerability affect short-term sentiment
Multiple rejections at $5.15-$5.30; failure to break means retest
Trading strategy
Conservative long (main strategy):
Light position near $5, add on pullback to $4.80-$4.90. Strict stop loss below $4.50 (structure invalidation). Partial take profit at $5.50-$5.80, second target $6.00-$6.50, mid-term target $7.50. Use 3-5x leverage, build positions in batches, don’t go all in at once.
Short-term swing:
Break and hold above $5.30, chase longs targeting $5.80-$6.00. Break below $4.76 with volume, light short test, target $4.50, stop loss $5.10. Avoid chasing back and forth around $5.00—that just pays fees to exchanges.
NEAR now resembles SOL at the end of 2023—
Back then, everyone said "Ethereum killers are dead," but SOL went from $20 to $200.
NEAR isn’t SOL, but the logic is similar: real usage, institutional channels, buyback mechanism, yet price is at a sentiment low.
$BTC $ETH $NEAR In the futures market, when an industrial company acquires a listing platform, I usually first look at what assets it brings in and how it will finance afterward, rather than just focusing on the word "approved." In traditional finance, such news is often interpreted as the opening of a capital operation gateway, but there is still some way to go before operational results are achieved.
This time, Metaplanet founder and CEO Simon Gerovich announced that the transaction with Nasdaq-listed company Super League Enterprise (SLE) has been formally approved by the latter's shareholders' meeting. According to the agreement, Metaplanet will inject 2,100 bitcoins and $2.5 million in cash.
My judgment is that this is a positive development for its layout in the US capital market, but it cannot be directly equated with new buying demand for $BTC. The agreement states asset injection, not a declaration of market purchases; shareholder approval advances the transaction but does not mean subsequent financing capabilities have been realized. The difference between the crypto market and traditional industrial acquisitions is that Bitcoin's own price volatility may also affect the market's evaluation of this asset injection.
I am more concerned about how this platform will be used afterward, rather than cheering for the coin price first. If it can broaden financing channels, then the significance of the layout will be clearer. This is my speculation. Are there any friends who have also transitioned from traditional markets? Let's talk about this difference: would you see it as an ordinary listing platform acquisition, or an extension of Bitcoin asset financing models?#The Hormuz reopening plan is still valid, can oil prices continue to fall?
The Middle East situation changes daily, but frankly, it's all about using oil prices as a bargaining chip on the table.
Let me break it down for you. The Iranian foreign minister said the "7-day reopening of the strait" plan still counts, but the conditions must be met. On the other side, Trump’s team also made a 60-day "oil price truce" and temporarily suspended some sanctions on Russia. The US Treasury Secretary also came out saying that once the conflict ends, inflation will naturally go down.
Sounds like things are cooling off, right? But if you look back at the market, Brent crude only dropped a bit over 1 point today, still hanging above $110. This is what you call talk of cooling down; the market doesn’t care at all, the money knows it’s just posturing.
What’s the impact?
First, the macro environment is still tightly constrained. Oil prices can’t drop below 110, so inflation expectations won’t come down. Without inflation dropping, the Fed cutting rates is just a dream. Although the Fed is collectively silent now, these oil tankers are actually voting on their behalf. With such high capital costs, why would big money outside the market rush into crypto?
Second, don’t be fooled by the word "truce." This 60-day truce is all political bargaining chips and can be broken at any time. As long as the Middle East isn’t truly peaceful, this oil price bomb can be triggered again anytime.
Don’t try to guess when they’ll sign an agreement; it’s unpredictable. Right now, it’s a typical macro deadlock: oil prices won’t fall, so the crypto market won’t see big one-sided moves.
What’s your take? $BTC It's another new week. Generally speaking, I don't trade during the weekend, nor do I recommend opening positions on weekends. The lower liquidity and thinner order books during weekends amplify capital fluctuations, making it easy for more extreme, sudden, and illogical unpredictable spikes up and down to occur. Additionally, institutional large capital participation is relatively low, so most of the weekend hours rarely reflect the true intentions of the capital. However, it is important to note that weekend volatility is not meaningless, especially around 4-7 AM Beijing time on Monday before the Asian session, which corresponds to the weekend afternoon in Eastern US time. During this period, capital movements often occur, and many times short-term spikes for liquidation either downward or upward happen. After liquidity hunting is completed, the market is usually quickly pulled back to the original consolidation range or chooses to move out in the opposite direction to form a new trend. Also, be aware that capital might conduct some smaller tests, front-running, or positioning during the low-volatility sideways movement over the weekend, all of which are worth traders' observation and some degree of analysis. Returning to this weekend, it was actually a relatively unusual and very interesting weekend. The trading volume was large, and capital from both directions showed obvious probing and even offensive moves, yet all with a strong sense of boundaries and order. This is not the first time I have described the current BTC market as "interesting." As for why I describe it this way, I think after reading my review below, you will share the same feeling. Let's start with the recent market liquidation movement early on the weekend morning Beijing time. The short-term drop at 5:15 may be related to the then on-chain US stock market largeEvening Review｜One Profit, One Loss, A Lesson the Market Taught Me
Two long positions, two different outcomes. $HYPE followed the capital trend, with a 20x long position smoothly floating in profit; $BICO was a subjective bottom-fishing attempt, directly facing the short-selling main force, deeply trapped in position.
Looking at smart money data clearly shows strength and weakness: BICO shorts have a very high profit ratio, capital continues to be bearish, yet I entered against the trend; HYPE's long-short battle is intense, price moves upward breaking the trend, capturing profits by following the momentum.
But also be alert, both positions have very low margin ratios, under full position mode, even a slight market reversal risks forced liquidation.
The core of trading is always to follow the trend, do not subjectively predict the bottom. Next, protect profits with stop-loss, set a plan to exit losing positions, strictly control leverage and position size, and prioritize risk management.
#机构资金转弱，BTC与ETH谁先迎来回流？
#SpaceX上市后首份完整季度财报将揭晓
#奈飞增长或放缓，广告业务成新看点 "Long scarce assets, short fiat currency"
Strive CEO Matt Cole's framework is straightforward: permanently long Bitcoin, short the US dollar. The logic is simple—over the past 55 years, scarce assets have consistently outperformed currency depreciation. Since 1970, gold has had a compound growth of 9.0%, while M2 was 6.7%; after the financial crisis, 9.5% versus 6.3%; post-pandemic, it even rose to 18.3% versus 6.5%.
Cole believes Bitcoin is digital gold and still in its early stages; once mature, its performance should surpass gold. As long as debt crises and currency depreciation continue, the excess returns of scarce assets relative to the US dollar will accelerate.
Strategically, he emphasizes that "leverage" is the key to outperforming Bitcoin, not the cost of capital. Maintaining high leverage over the long term without liquidation is extremely difficult. Most investors have yet to price in Strive's moat and often only realize it when Bitcoin hits sustainable new highs.
$BTC $ETH $SOL #Institutional funds weaken, who will see inflows first, BTC or ETH? #SpaceX's first full quarterly report after IPO will be unveiled #SpaceXQ3Earnings
SpaceX Q1'26E Beat - 3 Drivers:
1. Starlink scale: 6M+ subs = ∼$800M/mo recurring, high-margin revenue from Mini/Aviation deals.
2. Launch record: 48 Falcon launches vs 41 in Q4, more $67M-$150M commercial/NASA missions.
3. Government payouts: Starship + Starshield + HLS milestones triggering in Q1.
Result: Est. $4.8B -> $5.6B QoQ.Sun Yuchen appears glamorous but is actually struggling to keep up appearances, pretending that Huobi currently has strong funds and that users are rushing to deposit and play.
But the reality is that there are no real user deposits coming in, and the current users are not fools; once they get scammed, everyone will stay away.
Huobi HTX's net capital inflow in the past 24 hours is nearly $39 million, all deposited by Sun Yuchen himself, with no ordinary user deposits. #奈飞增长或放缓，广告业务成新看点 I didn't have time to look closely during the day at work, but at night, leaning back in my chair, I scrolled to this Strive post, and my drowsiness faded a bit 🌙. What keeps me awake isn't "another institution bought," but that they increased their holdings by over 4,000 coins at once, which easily makes people casually treat it as a market confirmation signal.
According to the 8-K filing Strive submitted to the US SEC, the company bought 4,045 bitcoins at an average price of about $82,803 each between October 12 and 16, 2026, bringing their total holdings to 36,818 coins. This includes the previously disclosed 2,822 coins, so you can't add the two messages together as new purchases.
My judgment is: this is somewhat positive for the institutional allocation narrative of $BTC, but not enough to independently determine the short-term direction. The actual increase in holdings provides a stronger layer of support than just verbal expectations; however, these purchases have already happened, and the announcement doesn't mean there will be demand of the same scale going forward. For someone like me who watches the market at night, distinguishing between "funds that have already bought" and "funds that will continue to buy" is more important than just being alerted by a headline.
A reminder to myself: understand the disclosure scope clearly, and don't use institutional holdings to make your own judgments. Is anyone else still awake at this hour, watching institutional holdings or the market? Regarding this increase, are you more concerned about the scale or whether it can be sustained afterward? Let's start with a reality check: institutional accumulation is real, but treating the entire purchase as fresh positive news is, in my opinion, an overestimation. According to the 8-K filing Strive submitted to the US SEC, the company bought 4,045 bitcoins at an average price of about $82,803 each between October 12 and 16, 2026, bringing their total holdings to 36,818 bitcoins. I prefer to see this as demand confirmation rather than conclusive evidence of a market uptrend.
I'm stuck on two points. First, out of these 4,045 bitcoins, 2,822 were already disclosed on October 14; if the market had already priced this in, interpreting the entire amount as new positive news would be double-counting the same demand. Second, the purchase has already happened, and the holding size shows Strive's exposure but doesn't directly prove that equally strong buying pressure will continue. Regarding short-term sentiment for $BTC, I'm concerned that the headline impact is running ahead of the actual incremental information.
Of course, the bulls might be right; I'm not bearish just because institutions are buying. If subsequent disclosures show continued new buying and prices hold steady after the news hype fades, I will retract my cautious stance. Regarding this news, are you bullish or bearish? Share your reasons: the disclosed portion accounts for the majority—why is it still enough or not enough to change your view?🔍 The headline says "Increase in Holdings," does that mean these 3,983 tokens were definitely bought from the market? I usually check this scope first, so don't rush to conclusions.
What can be confirmed from this information is: DeFi Development Corp. (Nasdaq: DFDV) stated that in the past week, its holdings of SOL and SOL equivalents increased by 3,983 tokens, bringing the total holdings to about 2,590,300 tokens. This is the company's disclosure, but the material does not specify the exact source of the increase.
An interesting detail here: the scope includes "equivalents," so you can't directly count the entire increase as spot market purchases; compared to existing holdings, this increase is not large. I tend to see it as a signal that the treasury strategy is still ongoing, rather than a strong positive factor that alone can drive the $SOL market.
This is my speculation: if the company continues to announce holding growth, then strengthening the market's recognition of its Solana treasury positioning might also be one of the motives. But disclosure bringing attention does not equal bringing new capital demand of the same scale; evidence is still lacking in between.
What I will focus on next is the source of the increase: market purchases or formed by other means? Let's all watch the follow-up together. Which explanation do you think is closer, and which detail do you most want to see in the next disclosure?#奈飞增长或放缓，广告业务成新看点
Although the subscription dividend from cracking down on password sharing has peaked, Netflix expects an operating profit margin of 33.2%. Combined with anticipated price increases and the continued penetration of low-cost ad packages, this is enough to support improved profitability. However, ad monetization still requires time to scale, and the market may be more sensitive to growth slowdown in the short term.